4.3 Review

Could E-cigarette vaping contribute to heart disease?

Journal

EXPERT REVIEW OF RESPIRATORY MEDICINE
Volume 14, Issue 11, Pages 1131-1139

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17476348.2020.1807332

Keywords

Electronic nicotine delivery system; cardiovascular disease; vaping; endothelial dysfunction; oxidative stress; acrolein

Funding

  1. Boehringer Ingelheim Foundation
  2. Foundation Heart of Mainz

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction E-cigarettes have become a controversial topic. While their benefits are questioned by the scientific community, a part of the medical profession is still supporting them as an effective harm reduction tool for smoking cessation. The impact of E-cigarettes on the cardiovascular system is still elusive. Areas covered We assessed results from animal, pre(clinical), and epidemiological studies to critically evaluate and synthesize evidence relevant to the cardiovascular effects of E-cigarettes. Animal studies have demonstrated that E-cigarette vapor exposure can cause endothelial and cardiac dysfunction. However, there have also been reports on the less harmful effects of E-cigarette vapor exposure in comparison to classical tobacco cigarettes. Measurements of flow-mediated dilation in acute human exposure settings have mostly demonstrated that E-cigarettes cause vascular endothelial dysfunction. Epidemiological studies have shown that E-cigarette use is associated with an increased risk for cardiovascular disease, although switching from classical tobacco cigarettes to E-cigarettes can have beneficial cardiovascular effects. Misinterpretation of scientific data by activists on either side is another problem. Expert opinion In conclusion, we need more and better (pre)clinical data comparing the health effects of E-cigarette vaping as compared with tobacco cigarette smoking, in order to counsel the legislation for better health policies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available