-
Toxicology Reports 2021Worldwide adoption of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and heated tobacco products (HTPs) has increased exponentially over the past decade. These products have been... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Worldwide adoption of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and heated tobacco products (HTPs) has increased exponentially over the past decade. These products have been proposed as non-combustible alternatives to traditional tobacco products such as cigarettes and may thus reduce the negative health consequences associated with tobacco smoke. However, the overall health impact and safety of using these products remains unclear. This review seeks to provide an updated summary of available evidence on changes to levels of tobacco-related biomarkers to aid the overall assessment of the consequences of using e-cigarettes and HTPs.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted through major databases (Medline/PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE) searching for articles directly comparing biomarker levels in humans using e-cigarettes or HTPs and those using combustible cigarettes. We included peer reviewed articles with comparative or longitudinal design and extracted key information for our purpose (type of population, demographics, biomarkers measurements, and health effects). An initial qualitative analysis was performed followed by a summary of findings.
RESULTS
A total of 44 studies were included from initial citations. The vast majority of the literature reported reductions in levels of biomarkers of tobacco smoke exposure (BOE), especially nicotine, MHBMA, 3-HPMA, S-PMA, 1-OHP and NNAL, when using e-cigarettes and HTPs compared to combustible cigarettes. There was a slight tendency toward a larger reduction in these biomarkers levels with the use of e-cigarettes, although direct comparisons between e-cigarettes and HTPs were lacking. There was also a trend toward positive changes in levels of biomarkers of biological effect (BOBE) with the use of e-cigarettes and HTPs.
CONCLUSIONS
A comparison of levels of biomarkers of tobacco-related exposure collected in clinical studies revealed that the use of e-cigarettes and HTPs could lead to a significant reduction in exposure to harmful substances compared to combusted cigarettes. In tandem, the health status of e-cigarettes and HTP users, indexed by levels of biomarkers of biological effect showed potential for improvement compared to smoking. However, larger and longer-term population-based studies are needed to further clarify these findings.
PubMed: 33552927
DOI: 10.1016/j.toxrep.2021.01.014 -
The Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic... Aug 2020Central centrifugal cicatricial alopecia (CCCA), a scarring alopecia that commonly affects women of African descent, can be challenging to manage, and there are limited... (Review)
Review
Central centrifugal cicatricial alopecia (CCCA), a scarring alopecia that commonly affects women of African descent, can be challenging to manage, and there are limited treatment modalities available. The use of natural ingredients for nonscarring hair loss has gained popularity among patients, but has not been previously studied for CCCA. We sought to review clinical studies evaluating the use of natural ingredients in the treatment of CCCA. Systematic searches of the PubMed and SCOPUS databases were performed in March 2018 using various ingredient names and the terms , and . Specific ingredients included azelaic acid, peppermint oil, pumpkin seed oil, garlic supplements/shampoo, Black castor oil, jojoba oil, argan oil, olive oil, horsetail plant oil, lavender oil, coconut oil, chamomile oil, thyme oil, tea tree oil, sulfur oil, menthol, and rosemary oil. Two reviewers independently screened titles, leading to the selection of eight clinical studies. A review of the literature revealed no clinical trials that evaluated the treatment of CCCA with natural ingredients. Despite limited evidence-based research for CCCA, several natural ingredients showed efficacy in alopecia areata, androgenetic alopecia, and psoriatic alopecia. Upon review of the literature, there were no randomized, controlled studies evaluating the use of natural ingredients or aromatherapy in the management of CCCA. Despite this, several botanical and natural ingredients do show promise in treating androgenetic alopecia and alopecia areata. More clinical studies need to be performed to evaluate treatment options as a whole, including natural modalities, to better serve these patients.
PubMed: 33178378
DOI: No ID Found -
Clinical and Translational... Oct 2020In randomized controlled trials, L-menthol inhibits gastrointestinal peristalsis during endoscopy. Our goal was to quantitatively synthesize the available evidence to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
In randomized controlled trials, L-menthol inhibits gastrointestinal peristalsis during endoscopy. Our goal was to quantitatively synthesize the available evidence to evaluate the efficacy and safety of L-menthol for gastrointestinal endoscopy.
METHODS
We comprehensively searched for relevant studies published up to January 2020 in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. The main outcomes consisted of the proportion of no peristalsis, proportion of no or mild peristalsis, adenoma detection rate, and adverse events.
RESULTS
Eight randomized controlled trials analyzing 1,366 subjects were included. According to the pooled data, L-menthol significantly improved the proportion of no peristalsis (odds ratio [OR] = 6.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.94-8.57, P < 0.00001), and the proportion of no or mild peristalsis (OR = 7.89, 95% CI = 5.03-12.39, P < 0.00001) compared with the placebo, whereas it was not associated with an improvement in the adenoma detection rate (OR = 1.03, 95% CI = 0.54-1.99, P = 0.92). Adverse events did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (OR = 1.40, 95% CI = 0.75-2.59, P = 0.29).
DISCUSSION
The findings of this study support the use of L-menthol to suppress gastrointestinal peristalsis during endoscopic procedure.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal; Gastric Mucosa; Gastrointestinal Neoplasms; Humans; Menthol; Peristalsis; Preoperative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spasm; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33031198
DOI: 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000252 -
United European Gastroenterology Journal Dec 2020Bowel preparation for colonoscopy is often poorly tolerated due to poor palatability and adverse effects. This can negatively impact on the patient experience and on the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Bowel preparation for colonoscopy is often poorly tolerated due to poor palatability and adverse effects. This can negatively impact on the patient experience and on the quality of bowel preparation. This systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out to assess whether adjuncts to bowel preparation affected palatability, tolerability and quality of bowel preparation (bowel cleanliness).
METHODS
A systematic search strategy was conducted on PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify studies evaluating adjunct use for colonoscopic bowel preparation. Studies comparing different regimens and volumes were excluded. Specific outcomes studied included palatability (taste), willingness to repeat bowel preparation, gastrointestinal adverse events and the quality of bowel preparation. Data across studies were pooled using a random-effects model and heterogeneity assessed using -statistics.
RESULTS
Of 467 studies screened, six were included for analysis (all single-blind randomised trials; = 1187 patients). Adjuncts comprised citrus reticulata peel, orange juice, menthol candy drops, simethicone, Coke Zero and sugar-free chewing gum. Overall, adjunct use was associated with improved palatability (mean difference 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.29-0.96, < 0.001) on a scale of 0-5, acceptability of taste (odds ratio 2.75, 95% confidence interval: 1.52-4.95, < 0.001) and willingness to repeat bowel preparation (odds ratio 2.92, 95% confidence interval: 1.97-4.35, < 0.001). Patients in the adjunct group reported lower rates of bloating (odds ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval: 0.29-0.77, = 0.003) and vomiting (odds ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.81, = 0.007), but no difference in nausea ( = 0.10) or abdominal pain ( = 0.62). Adjunct use resulted in superior bowel cleanliness (odds ratio 2.52, 95% confidence interval: 1.31-4.85, = 0.006). Heterogeneity varied across outcomes, ranging from 0% (vomiting) to 81% (palatability), without evidence of publication bias. The overall quality of evidence was rated moderate.
CONCLUSION
In this meta-analysis, the use of adjuncts was associated with better palatability, less vomiting and bloating, willingness to repeat bowel preparation and superior quality of bowel preparation. The addition of adjuncts to bowel preparation may improve outcomes of colonoscopy and the overall patient experience.
Topics: Colonoscopy; Humans; Laxatives; Patient Outcome Assessment; Patient Satisfaction; Pharmaceutic Aids; Preoperative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Taste; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32838693
DOI: 10.1177/2050640620953224 -
BMC Public Health Jul 2020The United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA), under the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, banned characterizing flavors in cigarettes;...
BACKGROUND
The United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA), under the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, banned characterizing flavors in cigarettes; however, mentholated tobacco products were exempt. Since 2009, over 20 US jurisdictions and numerous countries around the world have extended this restriction to menthol. Currently, the FDA is reconsidering its position on a nation-wide menthol cigarette ban. However, the effects of such a ban remain unclear. We conducted a scoping review to explore the impact of a menthol cigarette ban on individual behaviors (initiation, cessation, and product switching), sales, and compliance.
METHODS
We conducted a search of the international literature using PubMed, EBSCO, and Web of Science (to November 25, 2019). We retrieved articles relevant to the impacts of an implemented or hypothetical menthol ban. We also included studies of flavored tobacco product bans due to their potential relevance in gauging compliance and product substitutability.
RESULTS
The search identified 493 articles, of which 24 were included. Studies examined the effects of implemented menthol bans (n = 6), hypothetical menthol bans (n = 12) and implemented flavor bans that exclude menthol (n = 6). Menthol bans were found to reduce sales and increase smoking cessation with only partial substitution for non-menthol cigarettes. US smokers' reactions to a hypothetical ban indicate that about 25-64% would attempt to quit smoking and 11-46% would consider switching to other tobacco products, including 15-30% to e-cigarettes. Flavor ban studies indicate reductions in initiation of 6%. Ban compliance was high, but studies indicate that the tobacco industry and retailers have attempted to circumvent their impact via packaging changes and online sales.
CONCLUSION
Our review finds that extending the US cigarette flavor ban to menthol products would promote smoking cessation and reduce initiation. This evidence supports further action by the FDA towards mentholated tobacco products. However, few studies have been conducted in the vaping era.
Topics: Cigarette Smoking; Commerce; Flavoring Agents; Humans; Menthol; Smoking Cessation; Taste; Tobacco Industry; Tobacco Products; United States; United States Food and Drug Administration
PubMed: 32641026
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-020-09055-z -
Impact of non-menthol flavours in e-cigarettes on perceptions and use: an updated systematic review.BMJ Open Oct 2019Given the exponential increase in the use of e-cigarettes among younger age groups and in the growth in research on e-cigarette flavours, we conducted a systematic...
OBJECTIVES
Given the exponential increase in the use of e-cigarettes among younger age groups and in the growth in research on e-cigarette flavours, we conducted a systematic review examining the impact of non-menthol flavoured e-cigarettes on e-cigarette perceptions and use among youth and adults.
DESIGN
PubMed, Embase, PyscINFO and CINAHL were systematically searched for studies published and indexed through March 2018.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Quantitative observational and experimental studies that assessed the effect of non-menthol flavours in e-cigarettes on perceptions and use behaviours were included. Specific outcome measures assessed are appeal, reasons for use, risk perceptions, susceptibility, intention to try, initiation, preference, current use, quit intentions and cessation.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Three authors independently extracted data related to the impact of flavours in tobacco products. Data from a previous review were then combined with those from the updated review for final analysis. Results were then grouped and analysed by outcome measure.
RESULTS
The review included 51 articles for synthesis, including 17 published up to 2016 and an additional 34 published between 2016 and 2018. Results indicate that non-menthol flavours in e-cigarettes decrease harm perceptions (five studies) and increase willingness to try and initiation of e-cigarettes (six studies). Among adults, e-cigarette flavours increase product appeal (seven studies) and are a primary reason many adults use the product (five studies). The role of flavoured e-cigarettes on smoking cessation remains unclear (six studies).
CONCLUSION
This review provides summary data on the role of non-menthol flavours in e-cigarette perceptions and use. Consistent evidence shows that flavours attract both youth and adults to use e-cigarettes. Given the clear findings that such flavours increase product appeal, willingness to try and initiation among youth, banning non-menthol flavours in e-cigarettes may reduce youth e-cigarette use. Longitudinal research is needed to examine any role flavours may play in quit behaviours among adults.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Age Factors; Consumer Behavior; Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems; Flavoring Agents; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Health Risk Behaviors; Humans; Perception; Smoking Cessation; Taste; Vaping; Young Adult
PubMed: 31619431
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031598 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2019Neuropathic pain is a consequence of damage to the central nervous system (CNS), for example, cerebrovascular accident, multiple sclerosis or spinal cord injury, or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Neuropathic pain is a consequence of damage to the central nervous system (CNS), for example, cerebrovascular accident, multiple sclerosis or spinal cord injury, or peripheral nervous system (PNS), for example, painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN), postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), or surgery. Evidence suggests that people suffering from neuropathic pain are likely to seek alternative modes of pain relief such as herbal medicinal products due to adverse events brought about by current pharmacological agents used to treat neuropathic pain. This review includes studies in which participants were treated with herbal medicinal products (topically or ingested) who had experienced neuropathic pain for at least three months.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the analgesic efficacy and effectiveness of herbal medicinal products or preparations for neuropathic pain, and the adverse events associated with their use.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and AMED to March 2018. We identified additional studies from the reference lists of the retrieved papers. We also searched trials registries for ongoing trials and we contacted experts in the field for relevant data in terms of published, unpublished or ongoing studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (including cross-over designs) of double-blind design, assessing efficacy of herbal treatments for neuropathic pain compared to placebo, no intervention or any other active comparator. Participants were 18 years and above and had been suffering from one or more neuropathic pain conditions, for three months or more.We applied no restrictions to language or gender. We excluded studies monitoring effects of isolated, single chemicals derived from the plant or synthetic chemicals based on constituents of the plant, if they were not administered at a concentration naturally present within the plant.We excluded studies monitoring the effects of traditional Asian medicine and Cannabinoids as well as studies looking at headache or migraine as these treatments and conditions are addressed in distinct reviews.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently considered trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB). The primary outcomes were participant-reported pain relief of 30%, or 50%, or greater, and participant-reported global impression of clinical change (PGIC). We also collected information on adverse events. We assessed evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.
MAIN RESULTS
We included two studies (128 participants). Both diabetic neuropathy and non-diabetic neuropathic pain conditions were investigated across these two studies.Two herbal medicinal products, namely nutmeg (applied topically as a 125 mL spray for four weeks, containing mace oil 2%, nutmeg oil 14%, methyl salicylate 6%, menthol 6%, coconut oil and alcohol) and St John's wort (taken in capsule form containing 900 μg total hypericin each, taken three times daily, giving a total concentration of 2700 mg for five weeks). Both studies allowed the use of concurrent analgesia.Both reported at least one pain-related outcome but we could not carry out meta-analysis of effectiveness due to heterogeneity between the primary outcomes and could not draw any conclusions of effect. Other outcomes included PGIC, adverse events and withdrawals. There were no data for participant-reported pain relief of 50% or greater or PGIC (moderate and substantial) outcomes.When looking at participant-reported pain relief of 30% or greater over baseline, we observed no evidence of a difference (P = 0.64) in response to nutmeg versus placebo (RR 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 1.85; 48.6% vs 43.2%). We downgraded the evidence for this outcome to very low quality.We observed no change between placebo and nutmeg treatment when looking at secondary pain outcomes. Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for pain reduction (0 to 100, where 0 = no pain reduction), were 44 for both nutmeg and placebo with standard deviations of 21.5 and 26.5 respectively. There was no evidence of a difference (P = 0.09 to 0.33) in total pain score in response to St John's wort compared to placebo, as there was only a reduction of 1 point when looking at median differences in change from baseline on a 0 to 10-point numeric rating scale.There was a total of five withdrawals out of 91 participants (5%) in the treatment groups compared to six of 91 (6.5%) in the placebo groups, whilst adverse events were the same for both the treatment and placebo groups.We judged neither study as having a low risk of bias. We attributed risk of bias to small study size and incomplete outcome data leading to attrition bias. We downgraded the evidence to very low quality for all primary and secondary outcomes reported in this review. We downgraded the quality of the evidence twice due to very serious limitations in study quality (due to small study size and attrition bias) and downgraded a further level due to indirectness as the included studies only measured outcomes at short-term time points. The results from this review should be treated with scepticism as we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There was insufficient evidence to determine whether nutmeg or St John's wort has any meaningful efficacy in neuropathic pain conditions.The quality of the current evidence raises serious uncertainties about the estimates of effect observed, therefore, we have very little confidence in the effect estimate; the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.
Topics: Adult; Analgesics; Chronic Pain; Humans; Neuralgia; Phytotherapy; Plant Extracts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30938843
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010528.pub4 -
Journal of Pharmacopuncture Sep 2018Averagely 80% to 90% of breastfeeding women experience the nipple pain and fissures. The important factor for successful breastfeeding is to treat this problem. This... (Review)
Review
Averagely 80% to 90% of breastfeeding women experience the nipple pain and fissures. The important factor for successful breastfeeding is to treat this problem. This study has done as a review with the aim of analysis of the clinical trials in the field of the prevention and treatment of the nipple fissures and pain due to the importance of breastfeeding. For this purpose, the key words of sore, nipples, fissure, trauma, wound, prevention, treatment, therapeutics, therapy, clinical trial, breastfeeding and their Persian synonyms and all of their possible combinations were searched in the national databases: SID and Iran Medex and Magiran, and in the international databases: PubMed, Scopus, Medline, Science direct by May 2017. The Jadad criterion was used to assess the quality of the articles and the articles with a score of 3 or more were included in this study. Finally, 48 clinical trials were reviewed that 17 of them (sample size 1801) scored 3 or more based on the Jadad criterion. Seven articles were also in the non- drug treatment group (sample size 491) and 2 articles in the drug treatment group (sample size 337) and 8 articles in the herbal treatment group (sample size 973).The results show that menthol and warm water compress as well as teaching the correct breastfeeding methods are effective treatments to prevent and treat the nipple pain and fissures. Moreover, applying the herbal medicine for prevention and treatment of the issues raised from breastfeeding may have beneficial such as . However, more studies with a great methodology are necessary to obtain more accurate evidence.
PubMed: 30283701
DOI: 10.3831/KPI.2018.21.017 -
Nicotine & Tobacco Research : Official... Sep 2019E-liquids are available in a high variety of flavors. A systematic classification of e-liquid flavors is necessary to increase comparability of research results. In the...
INTRODUCTION
E-liquids are available in a high variety of flavors. A systematic classification of e-liquid flavors is necessary to increase comparability of research results. In the food, alcohol, and fragrance industry, flavors are classified using flavor wheels. We systematically reviewed literature on flavors related to electronic cigarette use, to investigate how e-liquid flavors have been classified in research, and propose an e-liquid flavor wheel to classify e-liquids based on marketing descriptions.
METHODS
The search was conducted in May 2017 using PubMed and Embase databases. Keywords included terms associated with electronic cigarette, flavors, liking, learning, and wanting in articles. Results were independently screened and reviewed. Flavor categories used in the articles reviewed were extracted.
RESULTS
Searches yielded 386 unique articles of which 28 were included. Forty-three main flavor categories were reported in these articles (eg, tobacco, menthol, mint, fruit, bakery/dessert, alcohol, nuts, spice, candy, coffee/tea, beverages, chocolate, sweet flavors, vanilla, and unflavored). Flavor classifications of e-liquids in literature showed similarities and differences across studies. Our proposed e-liquid flavor wheel contains 13 main categories and 90 subcategories, which summarize flavor categories from literature to find a shared vocabulary. For classification of e-liquids using our flavor wheel, marketing descriptions should be used.
CONCLUSIONS
We have proposed a flavor wheel for classification of e-liquids. Further research is needed to test the flavor wheels' empirical value. Consistently classifying e-liquid flavors using our flavor wheel in research (eg, experimental, marketing, or qualitative studies) minimizes interpretation differences and increases comparability of results.
IMPLICATIONS
We reviewed e-liquid flavors and flavor categories used in research. A large variation in the naming of flavor categories was found and e-liquid flavors were not consistently classified. We developed an e-liquid flavor wheel and provided a guideline for systematic classification of e-liquids based on marketing descriptions. Our flavor wheel summarizes e-liquid flavors and categories used in literature in order to create a shared vocabulary. Applying our flavor wheel in research on e-liquids will improve data interpretation, increase comparability across studies, and support policy makers in developing rules for regulation of e-liquid flavors.
Topics: Biomedical Research; Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems; Flavoring Agents; Humans; Terminology as Topic; Vaping
PubMed: 29788484
DOI: 10.1093/ntr/nty101 -
PloS One 2018Systematic review of research examining consumer preference for the main electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) attributes namely flavor, nicotine strength, and type. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Systematic review of research examining consumer preference for the main electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) attributes namely flavor, nicotine strength, and type.
METHOD
A systematic search of peer-reviewed articles resulted in a pool of 12,933 articles. We included only articles that meet all the selection criteria: (1) peer-reviewed, (2) written in English, and (3) addressed consumer preference for one or more of the e-cigarette attributes including flavor, strength, and type.
RESULTS
66 articles met the inclusion criteria for this review. Consumers preferred flavored e-cigarettes, and such preference varied with age groups and smoking status. We also found that several flavors were associated with decreased harm perception while tobacco flavor was associated with increased harm perception. In addition, some flavor chemicals and sweeteners used in e-cigarettes could be of toxicological concern. Finally, consumer preference for nicotine strength and types depended on smoking status, e-cigarette use history, and gender.
CONCLUSION
Adolescents could consider flavor the most important factor trying e-cigarettes and were more likely to initiate vaping through flavored e-cigarettes. Young adults overall preferred sweet, menthol, and cherry flavors, while non-smokers in particular preferred coffee and menthol flavors. Adults in general also preferred sweet flavors (though smokers like tobacco flavor the most) and disliked flavors that elicit bitterness or harshness. In terms of whether flavored e-cigarettes assisted quitting smoking, we found inconclusive evidence. E-cigarette users likely initiated use with a cigarette like product and transitioned to an advanced system with more features. Non-smokers and inexperienced e-cigarettes users tended to prefer no nicotine or low nicotine e-cigarettes while smokers and experienced e-cigarettes users preferred medium and high nicotine e-cigarettes. Weak evidence exists regarding a positive interaction between menthol flavor and nicotine strength.
Topics: Age Factors; Consumer Behavior; Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems; Flavoring Agents; Humans; Nicotine; Sex Factors; Sweetening Agents; Taste Perception
PubMed: 29543907
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194145