Why the study?
Although electronic cigarettes are marketed as a safer alternative to combustible cigarettes, the effects of chronic e-cigarette use on vascular health remain uncertain.
Does chronic exclusive electronic cigarette use reduce flow-mediated vasodilation compared to non-use in healthy individuals?
Does chronic exclusive electronic cigarette use reduce flow-mediated vasodilation compared to non-use in healthy individuals?
Chronic exclusive e-cigarette use may have comparable adverse effects on endothelial health as combustible cigarettes, though pooled results for FMD reduction versus non-use did not reach statistical significance.
Chronic e-cigarette use may impair endothelial function; leaves open causal vascular risks versus smoking in prospective studies.
INTRODUCTION: Despite electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) being marketed as a safer alternative to combustible cigarettes, the effects of chronic e-cigarette use on vascular health remain uncertain. Our meta-analysis aimed to assess the health implications of chronic exclusive e-cigarette use on endothelial dysfunction, as measured by flow-mediated vasodilation (FMD). METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Scopus were searched for studies from 1 January 2004 to 31 March 2024. Four cross-sectional studies (n=769) were pooled using a random-effects model. The mean differences (MD) of FMD were reported by comparing exclusive e-cigarette use versus non-use; exclusive e-cigarette use versus combustible cigarette use; and combustible cigarette use versus non-use. RESULTS: = 84%). Similar MD of FMD in exclusive e-cigarette use and exclusive combustible cigarette use (vs non-use) suggested that both of these products might have comparable adverse influences on endothelial health. CONCLUSIONS: The limited availability of studies assessing the chronic impact of e-cigarette use restricted our ability to provide definitive findings. We emphasize the importance of additional research that explores the long-term impact of e-cigarette use on endothelial dysfunction, and identify key areas and give suggestions for further study.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: