Throughout the years, e-cigarettes design and technical features evolved, providing the market with updated products meeting consumers’ different demands. E-cigarette’s modernisation process also helped contain health implications. First generation ECs, usually referred to as cig-a-likes, have been conceived to resemble the design and feeling of traditional cigarettes. In early models, friable solder joints could release in aerosols particles of tin (associated with stannosis and pneumoconiosis [
30]), a flaw remedied by coating the thick wire with silver, using rigid joints external to the atomizer or connecting wires without solders rather through clamps [
31,
32]. The thick nickel or copper wire, tin- or silver-coated, was not included in second generation products and following [
33]. By removing the silicon cover from later products, its presence in aerosols drastically decreased [
34]. Nonetheless, the empowerment in second and third generation batteries, along with bigger atomizers and higher amounts of metal, allowed to generate larger volumes of aerosol [
35], resulting at the same time in a greater transfer of particles, metals, toxicants [
36,
37]. Furthermore, as voltage/power ratio increased, new potentially toxic by-products could emerge from the liquid [
34]. Likewise, in larger reservoirs such as those of second and third generation ECs, fluid stagnation could enrich aerosols with additional toxicants through repeated use [
37]. Fourth generation ECs, referred to as pod mod devices, have become popular among teenagers as a socially acceptable alternative to conventional cigarettes due to their stylish design (e.g. USB or teardrop shape), wide selection of flavours and user-friendly functions [
38,
39]. Their likeness to an USB memory stick allows them to be discretely used in no smoking areas and easily concealed from parents, contributing to a new widespread phenomenon, known as “stealth vaping” [
19,
40,
41]. A distinctive feature of fourth generations devices is the use of nicotine in its protonated form, which reduces the irritating effect on throat mucosa while increasing the amount of nicotine delivered in aerosols [
42]. The heterogeneity outlined above complicates research on potential health effects, since the variability in design and technical features prevents us from discussing e-cigarettes as a single device. Furthermore, besides type and age of the device, e-cigarette health impact depends on multiple variables including ambient factors (e.g. climate conditions, room size and density of people) and user’s habits (puff length and frequency) [
43].