Background: Electronic cigarettes were originally designed to reduce adult dependency on normal cigarettes and as a tobacco cessation tool to substitute traditional cigarettes. But it has become the most popular among...Background: Electronic cigarettes were originally designed to reduce adult dependency on normal cigarettes and as a tobacco cessation tool to substitute traditional cigarettes. But it has become the most popular among teenagers. Rationale: To investigate the immediate adverse respiratory effect of short-term electronic cigarette vapor inhalation. Method: Twenty-five subjects were randomly selected and used in this study. The respiratory resistance values were evaluated and used for comparison. The subjects were asked to breathe into the Airflow Perturbation Device (APD) for evaluation of their respiratory resistance before vaping (in triplicate). The same subjects, a minute later, were then asked to use one poke (3 seconds) of the e-Cigarette device to inhale e-Cigarette vapor with nicotine from a pod with 59 mg/ml nicotine. Immediately following the e-Cigarette use, their respiratory resistance was measured again (in triplicate). Results: Comparing the respiratory resistance values before and immediately after exposure to e-Cigarette vapor showed that their respiratory resistance increased almost immediately. Conclusion: Although there are long-term studies showing that the e-Cigarette is as harmful as regular cigarettes, this study showed a nearly immediate effect of using the e-Cigarette that significantly increased the respiratory resistance of the user. Very short exposure time to e-Cigarette vapor (3 seconds only), caused an immediate adverse physiologic effect in respiratory resistance.展开更多
Sixty-four pediatric patients with asthma exacerbation were studied. The c</span><span style="font-family:""><span style="font-family:Verdana;">hildren were subjected to resp...Sixty-four pediatric patients with asthma exacerbation were studied. The c</span><span style="font-family:""><span style="font-family:Verdana;">hildren were subjected to respiratory resistance evaluation using the Airflow Perturbation Device (APD) and spirometry evaluation. They were then adminis</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">tered albuterol and 15 minutes later the APD and spirometry evaluations w</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ere repeated. Eleven of the children could not perform spirometry. The APD re</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">sults demonstrated that respiratory resistance of the patients decreased by a</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">bout 20%, indicating that the APD could detect the expected response to bronchodilator. However, no similar conclusion could be made with the spirometry parameters (</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">FVC, FEV1, FEV1/FVC, and FEF25% - 75%) performed on the same patients. The differences on the spirometry parameters did not change </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">significantly before and after bronchodilator administration. Furthermore, th</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ese differences were negligibly increased or decreased for some with no consistency between the FVC, FEV1, FEV1/FVC, and FEF25% - 75%. Even though all the children were clinically improved after albuterol administration and discharged home, this could not be demonstrated by spirometry data. This study validates previous reports that spirometry is not a reliable pulmonary diagnostic tool for young children, as spirometry is highly effort-dependent and requires a substantial degree of patient cooperation. APD on the other hand is a reliable, simple, effortless diagnostic tool that can be utilized in evaluation and management of children with asthma symptoms and exacerbation.展开更多
文摘Background: Electronic cigarettes were originally designed to reduce adult dependency on normal cigarettes and as a tobacco cessation tool to substitute traditional cigarettes. But it has become the most popular among teenagers. Rationale: To investigate the immediate adverse respiratory effect of short-term electronic cigarette vapor inhalation. Method: Twenty-five subjects were randomly selected and used in this study. The respiratory resistance values were evaluated and used for comparison. The subjects were asked to breathe into the Airflow Perturbation Device (APD) for evaluation of their respiratory resistance before vaping (in triplicate). The same subjects, a minute later, were then asked to use one poke (3 seconds) of the e-Cigarette device to inhale e-Cigarette vapor with nicotine from a pod with 59 mg/ml nicotine. Immediately following the e-Cigarette use, their respiratory resistance was measured again (in triplicate). Results: Comparing the respiratory resistance values before and immediately after exposure to e-Cigarette vapor showed that their respiratory resistance increased almost immediately. Conclusion: Although there are long-term studies showing that the e-Cigarette is as harmful as regular cigarettes, this study showed a nearly immediate effect of using the e-Cigarette that significantly increased the respiratory resistance of the user. Very short exposure time to e-Cigarette vapor (3 seconds only), caused an immediate adverse physiologic effect in respiratory resistance.
文摘Sixty-four pediatric patients with asthma exacerbation were studied. The c</span><span style="font-family:""><span style="font-family:Verdana;">hildren were subjected to respiratory resistance evaluation using the Airflow Perturbation Device (APD) and spirometry evaluation. They were then adminis</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">tered albuterol and 15 minutes later the APD and spirometry evaluations w</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ere repeated. Eleven of the children could not perform spirometry. The APD re</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">sults demonstrated that respiratory resistance of the patients decreased by a</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">bout 20%, indicating that the APD could detect the expected response to bronchodilator. However, no similar conclusion could be made with the spirometry parameters (</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">FVC, FEV1, FEV1/FVC, and FEF25% - 75%) performed on the same patients. The differences on the spirometry parameters did not change </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">significantly before and after bronchodilator administration. Furthermore, th</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ese differences were negligibly increased or decreased for some with no consistency between the FVC, FEV1, FEV1/FVC, and FEF25% - 75%. Even though all the children were clinically improved after albuterol administration and discharged home, this could not be demonstrated by spirometry data. This study validates previous reports that spirometry is not a reliable pulmonary diagnostic tool for young children, as spirometry is highly effort-dependent and requires a substantial degree of patient cooperation. APD on the other hand is a reliable, simple, effortless diagnostic tool that can be utilized in evaluation and management of children with asthma symptoms and exacerbation.
