Report on Nicotine

Aerosol formation and production yields from 11 carbonyls (carbonyl concentration per aerosol mass unit) were investigated (1) from a fourth-generation (4th gen) e-cigarette device at different coil resistances and coil age (0–5000 puffs) using unflavored e-liquid with 2% benzoic acid nicotine salt, (2) between a sub-ohm third-generation (3rd gen) tank mod at 0.12 Ω and a 4th gen pod at 1.2 Ω using e-liquid with nicotine salt, together with nicotine yield, and (3) from 3rd gen coils of different metals (stainless steel, kanthal, nichrome) using e-liquid with freebase nicotine. Coil resistance had an inverse relationship with coil temperature, and coil temperature was directly proportional to aerosol mass formation. Trends in carbonyl yields depended on carbonyl formation mechanisms. Carbonyls produced primarily from thermal degradation chemistry (e.g., formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, propionaldehyde) increased per aerosol mass with higher coil resistances, despite lower coil temperature. Carbonyls produced primarily from chemistry initiated by reactive oxygen species (ROS) (e.g., hydroxyacetone, dihydroxyacetone, methylglyoxal, glycolaldehyde, lactaldehyde) showed the opposite trend. Coil age did not alter coil temperature nor aerosol mass formation but had a significant effect on carbonyl formation. Thermal carbonyls were formed optimally at 500 puffs in our study and then declined to a baseline, whereas ROS-derived carbonyls showed a slow rise to a maximum trend with coil aging. The 3rd gen versus 4th gen device comparison mirrored the trends in coil resistance. Nicotine yields per aerosol mass were consistent between 3rd and 4th gen devices. Coil material did not significantly alter aerosol formation nor carbonyl yield when adjusted for wattage. This work shows that sub-ohm coils may not necessarily produce higher carbonyl yields even when they produce more aerosol mass. Furthermore, carbonyl formation is dynamic and not generalizable during the coil’s lifetime. Finally, studies that compare data across different e-cigarette devices, coil age, and coil anatomy should account for the aerosol chemistry trends that depend on these parameters.

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Carbonyls and Aerosol Mass Generation from Vaping Nicotine Salt Solutions Using Fourth- and Third-Generation E-Cigarette Devices: Effects of Coil Resistance, Coil Age, and Coil Metal Material

Tran,

Chiu,

Hunsaker

et al. 2023

“…Over the last couple of years, the prevalence of use of nicotine salt-containing e-liquids has increased . When inhaled, the “throat hit” of nicotine salts is decreased when compared with free-base nicotine (Nic), at least at high concentrations. − Throat hit is a term colloquially used for a slightly irritating sensation in the throat caused by components of the aerosolized e-liquid, in particular nicotine, although other components may also contribute. While most users find a mild throat hit pleasurable, a strong throat hit is experienced as unpleasant, especially by novel users of nicotine products .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determination of Nicotine Protonation State in E-Liquids by Low-Resolution Benchtop NMR Spectroscopy

Hartendorp,

Ahlal,

Visser

et al. 2024

Over several years, e-liquids with "nicotine salts" have gained considerable popularity. These e-liquids have a low pH, at which nicotine occurs mostly in its monoprotonated form. Manufacturers usually accomplish this by the addition of an organic acid, such as levulinic acid, benzoic acid, or lactic acid. Nicotine in its protonated form can be more easily inhaled, enhancing the addictiveness and attractiveness of products. Several techniques have been described for measuring the protonation state of nicotine in e-liquids. However, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy is particularly suited for this purpose because it can be performed on unaltered e-liquids. In this article, we demonstrate the suitability of a benchtop NMR (60 MHz) instrument for determining the protonation state of nicotine in e-liquids. The method is subsequently applied to measure the protonation state of 33 commercially available e-liquids and to investigate whether the vaping process alters the protonation state of nicotine. For this purpose, the protonation state in the condensed aerosol obtained by automated vaping of different e-liquids was compared with that of the original e-liquids. Two distinct populations were observed in the protonation state of nicotine in commercial e-liquids: free-base (fraction of free-base nicotine α fb > 0.80) and protonated (α fb < 0.40). For 30 e-liquids out of 33, the information on the packaging regarding the presence of nicotine salt was in agreement with the observed protonation state. Three e-liquids contained nicotine salt, even though this was not stated on the packaging. Measuring the protonation state of nicotine before and after (machine) vaping revealed that the protonation state of e-liquids is not affected by vaping. In conclusion, it is possible to determine the nicotine protonation state with the described method. Two clusters can be distinguished in the protonation state of commercial e-liquids, and the protonation state of nicotine remains unchanged after vaping.

“…A rapid and substantial shift occurred in the United States electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) market after the emergence of nicotine salt-based e-liquid formulations. − The appeal of ENDS with e-liquids containing nicotine salts , compared to e-liquids containing freebase nicotine is largely driven by the rapid and efficient delivery of nicotine to ENDS users due to the modified physicochemical properties , and enhanced pharmacokinetics (PKs) , and pharmacodynamics . This market shift toward e-liquids containing nicotine salts corresponded with the rise in ENDS use among adolescents (ages 12–17) and young adults (ages 18–24) from 2015–2019. − In 2022, the leading ENDS brands were JUUL, Vuse, Blu, NJoy, and Logic .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physical and Chemical Characterization of Aerosols Produced from Experimentally Designed Nicotine Salt-Based E-Liquids

Harris

2024

Nicotine salt-based e-liquids deliver nicotine more rapidly and efficiently to electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) users than freebase nicotine formulations. Nicotine salt-based products represent a substantial majority of the United States ENDS market. Despite the popularity of nicotine salt formulations, the chemical and physical characteristics of aerosols produced by nicotine salt e-liquids are still not well understood. To address this, this study reports the harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHCs) and particle sizes of aerosols produced by laboratory-made freebase nicotine and nicotine salt e-liquids. The nicotine salt e-liquids were formulated with benzoic acid, citric acid, lactic acid, malic acid, or oxalic acid. The nicotine salt aerosols had different HPHC profiles than the freebase nicotine aerosols, indicating that the carboxylic acids were not innocent bystanders. The polycarboxylic acid e-liquids containing citric acid, malic acid, or oxalic acid produced higher acrolein yields than the monocarboxylic acid e-liquids containing benzoic acid or lactic acid. Across most PG:VG ratios, nicotine benzoate or nicotine lactate aerosols contained the highest nicotine quantities (in %) and the highest nicotine yields (per milligram of aerosol). Additionally, the nicotine benzoate and nicotine lactate e-liquids produced the highest carboxylic acid yields under all tested conditions. The lower acid yields of the citric, malic, and oxalic acid formulations are potentially due to a combination of factors such as lower transfer efficiencies, lower thermostabilities, and greater susceptibility to side reactions because of their additional carboxyl groups serving as new sites for reactivity. For all nicotine formulations, the particle size characteristics were primarily controlled by the e-liquid solvent ratios, and there were no clear trends between nicotine salt and freebase nicotine aerosols that indicated nicotine protonation affected particle size. The carboxylic acids impacted aerosol output, nicotine delivery, and HPHC yields in distinct ways such that interchanging them in ENDS can potentially cause downstream effects.