Dataset Information

Patterns of combustible and electronic cigarette use during pregnancy and associated pregnancy outcomes.

ABSTRACT: Although pregnant smokers may perceive electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) as safe alternatives to smoking combustible cigarettes, few studies have evaluated perinatal e-cigarette use and its associated health effects. We analyzed data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS, 2016-2018) for 16,022 women who recently gave birth and reported smoking combustible cigarettes prior to pregnancy. Using average marginal predictive values from multivariable logistic regression to produce adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs), we estimated the prevalence of combustible cigarette smoking during pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes associated with e-cigarette use. In total, 14.8% of smoking women reported using e-cigarettes prior to pregnancy. There was no association between e-cigarette use prior to pregnancy and combustible cigarette smoking during pregnancy (aPR 0.95; 95% CI 0.88, 1.02); however, e-cigarette use during pregnancy was associated with higher prevalence of combustible cigarette smoking during pregnancy (aPR 1.65; 95% CI 1.52, 1.80). In this sample, we did not observe evidence to support reduced risk of preterm birth, small-for-gestational age and low birthweight compared to combustible cigarette smoking during pregnancy. The prevalence of LBW was higher for those who used e-cigarettes, even exclusively, compared to women who quit smoking cigarettes entirely. These results suggest that e-cigarettes should not be considered a safe alternative to combustible cigarette smoking during pregnancy.

SUBMITTER: Regan AK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8241992 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: The microbiome is increasingly being linked to cancer risk. Little is known about the lung and oral cavity microbiomes in healthy smokers (SM), and even less for electronic cigarette (EC) users, compared healthy never-smokers (NS). Methods: In a cross-sectional pilot study of SM (N=8), EC users (N=10) and NS (N=10) saliva and bronchoscopy-collected bronchoalveolar lavage samples were collected. Bacteria species were identified through metatranscriptome profiling by RNA-sequencing to study associations with the lung and oral microbiome. Pairwise comparisons and linear modeling was assessed with false discovery rates <0.1. Results: Total bacterial load was similar for the SM, EC users and NS, and there was no differences in the bacterial diversity across groups. In the lung, there were 44 bacterial species that were statistically significantly different for SM/NS, 80% of which were decreased in the SM. There were 12 bacterial species that were different for SM/EC users, all of which were decreased, 10 of which were also identified in the SM/NS comparison. The 2 bacterial species unique to SM/EC comparison were Neisseria sp. KEM232 and Curvibacter sp. AEP1-3. From the top 5 decreased species in SM/EC, 3 were also identified in the SM/NS comparison (Neisseria elongata, Neisseria sicca, and Haemophilus parainfluenzae) and 2 of these were unique to the SM/EC comparison (Neisseria zoodegmatis and Ottowia sp. oral taxon 894). There were 8 species increased in SM compared to NS, none of which are known to be clinically significant. In the oral microbiome, 152 bacteria species were differentially abundant for the SM/NS analysis, and only 17 for the EC/NS comparison, all which were also present in SM/NS comparisons. There were 21 bacteria that were differentially abundant in both the lung and oral cavity for SM and NS, 95% also were decreased in the SM. Conclusion: Smoking and EC use do not appear to materially affect the lung microbiome, although differences are noted of unclear clinical significance. Most differentially abundant bacteria decreased, which may be due to a toxic effect of cigarette smoke, including a change in humidity or heating. Given the low number of overlapping oral and lung microbes, the oral microbiome does not appear to be a good surrogate for smoking-related effects in the lung.

Dataset Information

Patterns of combustible and electronic cigarette use during pregnancy and associated pregnancy outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure