Annette K Regan1, Jennifer M Bombard, Michelle M O'Hegarty, Ruben A Smith, Van T Tong. 1. School of Public Health, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas; the Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, and the School of Nursing and Health Professions, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, California; and the Division of Reproductive Health, the Office on Smoking and Health, and the National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk of adverse birth outcomes among adults who use electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) before and during pregnancy. METHODS: Data from the 2016-2018 PRAMS (Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System) were used to assess the association between e-cigarette use during the 3 months before and last 3 months of pregnancy among 79,176 individuals with a recent live birth and the following birth outcomes: preterm birth, small for gestational age, and low birth weight (LBW). Adjusted prevalence ratios were generated using average marginal predictions from multivariable logistic regression models. Models were stratified by prenatal combustible cigarette smoking and frequency of e-cigarette use (daily or less than daily use). RESULTS: In the 3 months before pregnancy, 2.7% (95% CI 2.6-2.9%) of respondents used e-cigarettes; 1.1% (95% CI 1.0-1.2%) used e-cigarettes during the last 3 months of pregnancy. Electronic cigarette use before pregnancy was not associated with adverse birth outcomes. Electronic cigarette use during pregnancy was associated with increased prevalence of LBW compared with nonuse (8.1% vs 6.1%; adjusted prevalence ratio 1.33; 95% CI 1.06-1.66). Among respondents who did not also smoke combustible cigarettes during pregnancy (n=72,256), e-cigarette use was associated with higher prevalence of LBW (10.6%; adjusted prevalence ratio 1.88; 95% CI 1.38-2.57) and preterm birth (12.4%; adjusted prevalence ratio 1.69; 95% CI 1.20-2.39). When further stratified by frequency of e-cigarette use, associations were seen only for daily users. CONCLUSION: E-cigarette use during pregnancy, particularly when used daily by individuals who do not also smoke combustible cigarettes, is associated with adverse birth outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk of adverse birth outcomes among adults who use electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) before and during pregnancy. METHODS: Data from the 2016-2018 PRAMS (Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System) were used to assess the association between e-cigarette use during the 3 months before and last 3 months of pregnancy among 79,176 individuals with a recent live birth and the following birth outcomes: preterm birth, small for gestational age, and low birth weight (LBW). Adjusted prevalence ratios were generated using average marginal predictions from multivariable logistic regression models. Models were stratified by prenatal combustible cigarette smoking and frequency of e-cigarette use (daily or less than daily use). RESULTS: In the 3 months before pregnancy, 2.7% (95% CI 2.6-2.9%) of respondents used e-cigarettes; 1.1% (95% CI 1.0-1.2%) used e-cigarettes during the last 3 months of pregnancy. Electronic cigarette use before pregnancy was not associated with adverse birth outcomes. Electronic cigarette use during pregnancy was associated with increased prevalence of LBW compared with nonuse (8.1% vs 6.1%; adjusted prevalence ratio 1.33; 95% CI 1.06-1.66). Among respondents who did not also smoke combustible cigarettes during pregnancy (n=72,256), e-cigarette use was associated with higher prevalence of LBW (10.6%; adjusted prevalence ratio 1.88; 95% CI 1.38-2.57) and preterm birth (12.4%; adjusted prevalence ratio 1.69; 95% CI 1.20-2.39). When further stratified by frequency of e-cigarette use, associations were seen only for daily users. CONCLUSION: E-cigarette use during pregnancy, particularly when used daily by individuals who do not also smoke combustible cigarettes, is associated with adverse birth outcomes.
Authors: Laura R Stroud; George D Papandonatos; Nancy C Jao; Raymond Niaura; Stephen Buka; Neal L Benowitz Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2022-02-17 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Jose Miguel Sequí-Canet; Jose Miguel Sequí-Sabater; Ana Marco-Sabater; Francisca Corpas-Burgos; Jose Ignacio Collar Del Castillo; Nelson Orta-Sibú Journal: J Clin Transl Res Date: 2022-01-03
Authors: Vinoj H Sewberath Misser; Ashna D Hindori-Mohangoo; Arti Shankar; Jeffrey K Wickliffe; Maureen Y Lichtveld; Dennis R A Mans Journal: Toxics Date: 2022-08-11