4.7 Article

A direct method for e-cigarette aerosol sample collection

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
Volume 149, Issue -, Pages 151-156

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2016.05.008

Keywords

E-cigarettes; Aerosol; Sampling; Method

Funding

  1. Alfonso Martin Escudero Foundation
  2. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, United States [T32ES007141-31A1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

E-cigarette use is increasing in populations around the world. Recent evidence has shown that the aerosol produced by e-cigarettes can contain a variety of toxicants. Published studies characterizing toxicants in e-cigarette aerosol have relied on filters, impingers or sorbent tubes, which are methods that require diluting or extracting the sample in a solution during collection. We have developed a collection system that directly condenses e-cigarette aerosol samples for chemical and toxicological analyses. The collection system consists of several cut pipette tips connected with short pieces of tubing. The pipette tip-based collection system can be connected to a peristaltic pump, a vacuum pump, or directly to an e-cigarette user for the e-cigarette aerosol to flow through the system. The pipette tip-based system condenses the aerosol produced by the e-cigarette and collects a liquid sample that is ready for analysis without the need of intermediate extraction solutions. We tested a total of 20 e-cigarettes from 5 different brands commercially available in Maryland. The pipette tip-based collection system condensed between 0.23 and 0.53 mL of post-vaped e-liquid after 150 puffs. The proposed method is highly adaptable, can be used during field work and in experimental settings, and allows collecting aerosol samples from a wide variety of e-cigarette devices, yielding a condensate of the likely exact substance that is being delivered to the lungs. (c) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available