• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Exclusive cigar smoking in the United States and smoking-related diseases: A systematic review

    2020-12-16 09:00:46PeterLeeJanetteHamlingAlisonThornton
    World Journal of Meta-Analysis 2020年3期

    Peter N Lee,Janette S Hamling, Alison J Thornton

    Peter N Lee, Department of Statistics, P.N.Lee Statistics and Computing Ltd., Sutton, Surrey SM2 5DA, United Kingdom

    Janette S Hamling, Department of Statistics, RoeLee Statistics Ltd., Sutton SM2 5DA, United Kingdom

    Alison J Thornton, Independent Consultant, Okehampton, Devon EX20 1SG, United Kingdom

    Abstract

    Key words: Tobacco products; Cigar smoking; Lung neoplasms; Pulmonary disease; Chronic obstructive; Heart diseases; Stroke; Circulatory disease; Systematic review; Metaanalysis

    INTRODUCTION

    There is extensive evidence on the relationship of cigarette smoking to health endpoints but far less evidence relating to cigar smoking.While some studies have reported results relating to dual use of cigars and pipes[1-4]or to cigar smoking in those who may also smoke other tobacco products[5], the health effects of exclusive cigar smoking have been less often reported.Comparing disease risk in cigar smokers who have never smoked other tobacco products with that in never smokers of any tobacco product avoids the problems of residual confounding by other smoking habits and of possible differences in cigar smoking habits (such as depth of inhalation[6]) in those who have ever smoked other tobacco products.

    Exclusive cigar smoking is much less common than cigarette smoking so the population studied must be large enough to include enough exclusive cigar smokers for a useful risk assessment to be made.For this reason we have restricted attention to studies in the United States, a country not only with a large population, but one where cigar smoking is relatively common compared with other countries[7,8].We also restrict attention to the major smoking-related diseases.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    Study inclusion criteria

    Published studies were included if they were carried out in the United States and reported the risk of lung cancer or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or heart disease, stroke and/or overall circulatory disease, comparing exclusive cigar smokers (current, former or ever cigar smokers who never smoked other tobacco products) with never smokers of any tobacco (or a closely-related comparison group).The results considered were for overall lung cancer rather than lung cancer subtypes, and related to overall risk measures rather than dose response indices, although dose response results by amount smoked were also identified.

    Literature searches

    Searching for results on cigar smoking was complicated by the MEDLINE search term “cigar smoking” being available only from the start of 2018.Before then the only search term to include cigar smoking was “tobacco products”.

    For lung cancer, the first step was to examine publications from a previous review relating lung cancer to various indices of smoking based on studies published during the 1900s[9].Subsequently three different MEDLINE searches were conducted using terms such as (“cigar” or “cigars”), “United States” and “l(fā)ung neoplasms”.This was followed by a fourth search that attempted to retrieve relevant papers that had not yet been indexed with MeSH terms on MEDLINE, this search not being lung cancer specific.A fifth search used wholly non-MeSH search terms, with the final stage being to look for relevant results in papers identified as relevant in the searches for COPD and for heart disease, stroke and circulatory diseases.

    For COPD, the process started with three different MEDLINE searches using the terms “COPD” or “pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive” to identify the disease.The fourth search used the term “Smoking” rather than “Cigar”, while the fifth search used the MeSH terms “Smoking/mortality” or “Smoking/adverse effects”.The next step was to review the results from the fourth lung cancer search, while the final step was to look at papers identified as relevant in the searches for lung cancer and for heart disease, stroke and circulatory diseases.

    For heart disease, stroke and circulatory diseases, the process started with four different MEDLINE searches using the disease terms “Heart disease”, “Stroke” or “Heart”.The next step was again to review the results from the fourth lung cancer search, while the final step was to look at relevant papers from the lung cancer and COPD searches.

    Searching ended when no new data was found and all the papers referenced by reviews had been examined.Full details of the searches are given in Supplementary material.

    Sorting publications into studies and avoidance of overlap

    The papers identified in the searches were reviewed for the studies they reported, and multiple publications reporting the same study were identified.

    The source papers identified as providing relevant estimates were then considered for overlap of reporting.Where more than one of the source papers reported on the same study, the results may have been reported in different ways or for different lengths of follow-up, or have combined results from multiple studies.

    Data recorded

    For each paper identified as providing relevant results details were entered onto a study database and a linked relative risk (RR) database for the relevant disease.

    The study database contained a record for each study describing the following aspects: A study name based on the published study name or on the name of the first author of the paper; study title; study design; sexes considered; age range and other details of the population studied; timing and length of follow-up; details of overlaps or links with other studies; number of cases; number of controls or subjects at risk; types of controls and matching factors used in case-control studies; and confounding variables considered.

    The RR database holds the detailed results, typically containing multiple records for each study.Each record is linked to the relevant study via the study name, and holds details of a specific risk estimate.It records the type of estimate, its value and confidence interval, its source and other details such as the age range included in the estimate if this is different from the overall study age range.Some estimates were taken directly from the source paper.Others were derived using the details provided in the paper.

    Where no RR estimate was given or a RR estimate was given without a confidence interval, information on the sample size and the number of deaths was used to estimate these.Estimates for separate independent subsets of the population such as age groups were combined using simple meta-analysis.Non-independent RRs using a common comparison group (e.g., never smokers) were combined using the Hamling method[10].This method was used to combine RRs by number of cigars smoked per day and to combine RRs for former and current smokers to give an estimate for ever smokers.It was also used to estimate risk for overall circulatory disease when the study provided separate estimates for cerebrovascular disease and a broad definition of coronary heart disease, and to estimate overall stroke from separate risk estimates for ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke.The International Classification of Disease codes used to define IHD, stroke and circulatory disease can be found at https://coder.aapc.com/icd-10-codes-range/110.

    Each extract was carried out by one of the authors, the entered data and any additional calculations then being reported and checked by another of the authors, with problems discussed and amendments made until both agreed that the data entered were a true representation of the study data.

    Dose-response data on risk by number of cigars smoked per day were also identified and are discussed below.

    Statistical analysis

    For each disease considered, fixed-effect and random-effects meta-analyses were conducted using the Fleiss and Gross method[11], with heterogeneity quantified by H, the ratio of the heterogeneity to its degrees of freedom, which is directly related to theI2statistic[12]by the formulaI2= 100 (H-1)/H.

    Whenever more than one paper provided equivalent results for a study, only one result was included in a meta-analysis.The selection of the result was based on four criteria: Prospective follow-up was given preference over cross-sectional analysis at baseline; the longest follow-up reported (for prospective studies); the widest age range reported; and finally the RR adjusted for the most confounding factors.

    Some papers provided results for comparisons that did not exactly match our selection criteria.Where any were relevant to a meta-analysis, the analysis was performed excluding those results, and then including them in a sensitivity analysis.

    The KAISER study[13]used a questionnaire that asked about the participant’s history of cigarette smoking and their current pipe and cigar smoking.Ever cigarette smokers were excluded from their analyses.It was, therefore, possible to identify participants who had never smoked cigarettes and who did not, at baseline, smoke cigars or a pipe.This is not completely equivalent to our requirement for the comparison group to be never smokers of any tobacco product.Also, the participants categorised as current cigar smokers may have included former pipe smokers.However, the study was large (1546 current cigar smokers and 16228 never cigarette smokers) and had a long followup (25-26 years) so justified inclusion in sensitivity analyses.

    For the MALHOT study a pooled analysis of data from five large prospective studies was reported[14].Of these studies, two (the Netherlands Cohort Study and the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study) were conducted outside the United States, while the other three (the VITamins And Lifestyle study, the NIH-AARP Diet and Health study and the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial) were conducted in the United States.However, the studies in the United States were larger and formed 85.7% of the total population reported, and the largest of the studies (NIH-AARP) followed up participants for a median of 15.5 years.The size of this pooled analysis, the large proportion of participants from the United States, the long follow-up in the largest study, and the lack of study-specific reports relating to cigar smoking for the studies pooled justified including the combined results in sensitivity analysis.

    For the NHIS study, a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data[15]reports results for a definition of “Heart conditions” including angina, coronary heart disease, heart attack and other heart disease which is too broad for the results to be included in our main analysis of ischaemic heart disease (IHD).However, as the report considers data from four years’ surveys of this large, repeated, nationally representative study, and as no other source was found that reported IHD for this study, it was decided to include its results in sensitivity analysis.

    Also for the NHIS study, an analysis of prospective findings from six years’ survey data with follow up for at least five years, the source publication[16]reports results for a broad definition of coronary heart disease which includes rheumatic fever, some hypertensive heart disease, IHD and some other heart disease.Though this definition is too broad to be included in our analyses of IHD, the paper also reports results for cerebrovascular disease (stroke), and taken together, the definitions of coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease were very close to our ideal definition of circulatory disease.We therefore combined the results for coronary heart disease and for cerebrovascular disease, and included the resulting estimates in the sensitivity analyses for overall circulatory disease.

    The NLMS study[17]reported too broad a definition of cardiovascular disease, an ideal definition of stroke and a definition of circulatory disease that included all the relevant disease categories except diseases of the veins and other diseases of the circulatory system.The reported results for stroke were included in the main metaanalyses and the results for circulatory disease were included in sensitivity analysis only.

    RESULTS

    Literature search

    For lung cancer, 17 publications were identified that were relevant to the metaanalyses (including the sensitivity analyses), 13 from the previous review[9], three from additional searches, and one from reviews identified in the searches, as shown in Figure 1.Two of these[18,19]are by the same authors reporting the same study, the first giving overall study information and the second giving results by disease, so only the latter is cited in the analysis results.For COPD, four publications were identified (Figure 2), while for heart disease, stroke and circulatory disease 12 were found (Figure 3).

    Studies

    Table 1[13,14,17-31](lung cancer), Table 2[13,17,23,27](COPD), and Table 3[13,15-17,19,21,23,26-28,32,33](heart disease, stroke and circulatory disease) present details on each study, including its name, the source publications, the study type, the years of follow-up, the study size, and the sexes and age groups considered.Results used in sensitivity analyses only are marked with an asterisk.Table 3 also includes details of the definition of heart disease, stroke and circulatory diseases.

    For lung cancer, the 17 publications relate to 11 studies, though two (KAISER, MALHOT) are only used in sensitivity analyses.Eight of the studies are of prospective design and three case-controls.Except for NLMS, which considers both sexes, all provide results only for males.The studies vary widely in size, with three involving over 400000 people, and four less than 10000.

    For COPD, the four publications concern separate studies, though again KAISER is only used in sensitivity analyses.All the studies are prospective, with all except NLMS considering only males.All four of these studies also provide results for lung cancer.The study size in KAISER is much lower than in the other three studies.

    For heart disease, stroke and circulatory disease, the 12 publications concern eight studies: Six prospective, one case-control and one reported both as a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data and using prospective follow-up.KAISER (all results), NHIS (prospective results for circulatory disease and cross-sectional results for ischaemic heart disease) and NMLS (results for circulatory disease) were only used in the sensitivity analyses.Most results were for men only, the exceptions being those from NHIS and NLMS that were for the sexes combined.As for lung cancer, the studies varied widely in size.

    Overall, as many studies provided data for more than one disease, there were 13 studies, of which two only provided results for the sensitivity analyses and two others had some results restricted to sensitivity analyses.

    Meta-analyses

    The individual study RR estimates used are given in Table 4[13-17,19,20,22,23,25,27-33], with the results of the meta-analyses conducted summarised in Table 5.Unless otherwise stated references to combined estimates are to random-effects estimates, with 95%CI given in parentheses.

    Lung cancer

    For current smokers there was highly significant heterogeneity (P< 0.001) between the five estimates, which ranged from 1.66 (1.18 to 2.34) for DORN to 5.10 (4.00 to 6.60) for CPS II.The overall estimate was 3.12 (2.11 to 4.62).Including the result from study KAISER little affected the combined estimate, which became 2.98 (2.08 to 4.26).

    Table 1 Studies in meta-analysis of lung cancer and exclusive cigar smoking1

    The four results for former smokers showed no significant heterogeneity (atP< 0.1), and gave a somewhat lower estimate of 1.61 (1.23 to 2.09).

    The nine results for ever smokers showed significant (P< 0.05) heterogeneity due to the high estimate from BOUCOT of 8.81.The rest of the estimates ranged from 1.02 to 3.01.The overall estimate was 2.11 (1.64 to 2.72).When the result from MALHOT was included, this became 2.22 (1.79 to 2.74).

    COPD

    None of the analyses showed significant heterogeneity, and there was very limited evidence of an association.Results were available from only four studies and for only two of these were results available for each of the exposures current, former and ever smokers (Table 4).This resulted in all the combined estimates being based on between two and four results.For current smokers the overall estimate was slightly raised at 1.42 (0.89 to 2.26) excluding KAISER and 1.44 (1.16 to 1.77) including KAISER, but no increase was seen for ever smokers 0.86 (0.48 to 1.54).For former smokers, the overall estimate of 0.47 had an extremely wide CI of 0.02 to 9.88, based on individual estimates of 0.05 (0.00 to 3.19) and 1.38 (0.42 to 4.51).

    IHD, stroke and circulatory disease

    As is evident from Table 5, overall estimates generally only slightly exceeded 1.00, though some of those for IHD and circulatory disease, but not stroke, were significantly raised (atP< 0.05).There was also evidence of heterogeneity in some of the meta-analyses presented.Generally, the results from the sensitivity analyses were similar to those from the main analyses, so only the former set of results, which involve more studies, are considered below.

    Table 2 Studies in meta-analysis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and exclusive cigar smoking1

    For ischaemic heart disease, the estimates were somewhat higher for former than current smokers, being 1.11 (1.04 to 1.19) for current smokers, 1.26 (1.03 to 1.53) for former smokers, and 1.15 (1.08 to 1.23) for ever smokers.

    For stroke, the estimates were all closer to 1.00, but again somewhat higher for former than current smokers, being 1.02 (0.92 to 1.13) for current smokers, 1.08 (0.85 to 1.38) for former smokers, and 1.11 (0.95 to 1.31) for ever smokers.

    For overall circulatory disease, the three estimates were quite similar, being 1.10 (1.05 to 1.16) for current smokers, 1.11 (0.84 to 1.46) for former smokers and 1.15 (1.06 to 1.26) for ever smokers.

    Dose-response data

    Many studies did not provide data on risk by number of cigars smoked per day.Table 6[13,17,23,27,30,32,33]summarizes the limited data available from six studies, five of which provided data for ischaemic heart disease, four for lung cancer, and two for COPD.With the possible exception of the result for the SADOWS study, the data for lung cancer seemed consistent with an increasing risk with increasing amount smoked.The data for COPD and for ischaemic heart disease, however, did not consistently show any clear increase in risk with amount smoked.

    DISCUSSION

    The meta-analysis results show some increase in risk among exclusive cigar smokers for each disease studied, except for stroke where all the risk estimates were close to 1.For current smoking the overall estimates in the sensitivity analyses were 2.98 for lung cancer, 1.44 for COPD and 1.11 for ischaemic heart disease.These are much lower than those associated with cigarette smoking: For the United States, estimates for current cigarette smokers[34]are 11.68 for lung cancer and 4.56 for COPD; for ischaemic heart disease[34]the current cigarette smoker estimate for age 65 to 74 is 1.70, with estimates for younger ages being higher.Even for heavy cigar smokers, the RRs shown in Table 6 are still generally lower than the estimates for overall cigarette smoking.For former smoking the estimates of 1.61 for lung cancer, 0.47 for COPD (though based on only two widely differing estimates) and 1.26 for ischaemic heart disease are again much lower than those for cigarette smoking.Similar results were observed for ever smoking.

    There are some limitations with the data available for our analyses.Several of the studies were conducted some time ago.The numbers of exclusive cigar smokers participating in the studies were often quite low.Very few studies have reported results for exclusive cigar smokers.For many of these studies, cigar smoking is not the primary focus of the study.This suggests that there may be reporting bias, in that other studies may have had relevant data but did not report a non-significant finding for the study’s small number of cigar smokers.

    Table 3 Studies on ischaemic heart disease, stroke and circulatory disease and exclusive cigar smoking1

    There was a limited amount of dose-response data, and a lack of data on how risk varied by type of cigar smoked.No meta-analyses could be carried out by subgroups such as race and age and gender, as there was insufficient data.No study reported results for sex separately, so no analysis by sex could be done.

    Nevertheless, the data provide fairly clear evidence that exclusive cigar smoking is associated with an increased risk of lung cancer, though less markedly than is the case for exclusive cigarette smoking.For COPD and ischaemic heart disease, the association is weaker, and is also less than that for cigarette smoking.

    How do these results compare with previous estimates? It should be noted that no other review has provided meta-analysis estimates for exclusive cigar smokers in the United States, and that many of the previous reviews considered below were conducted many years ago.

    The review of smoking and lung cancer[9]referred to under literature searches provided random effects meta-analysis estimates for lung cancer in current, former and ever exclusive cigar smokers of 4.67 (n = 15), 2.85 (n = 5) and 2.95 (n = 15) respectively, but these analyses were not restricted to studies in the United States.The risk estimates included in those analyses showed significant heterogeneity.A review by Wynder et al[35]considering the risk of lung cancer in pipe and cigar smokers noted that, in prospective studies in North America the mortality ratios were in the range 2 to 6.For retrospective studies, mostly conducted in Germany and Switzerland, “it appears that the risk of lung cancer is higher than that for such smokers in the United States”.This review suggested that these differences stemmed from different patterns of inhalation in the two regions.A similar review by Higgins et al[31], also considering pipe and cigar smokers, again suggested that risk estimates from prospective studies in North America are lower than those from case control studies in Europe.Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No.9[23], reviewing data from CPS-I, stated that “Lung cancer mortality ratios increase with increasing number of cigars smoked per day and with increasing depth of inhalation.When depth of inhalation and number of cigars per day are examined together, depth of inhalation is more powerful in predicting lung cancer risk than number of cigars smoked per day.” The 1979 report by the Surgeon General[36]summarised the available evidence as “Several prospective epidemiological studies have demonstrated higher lung cancer mortality ratios for pipe and cigar smokers than for nonsmokers, but the risk of developing lung cancer for pipe and cigar smokers is less than for cigarette smokers”.

    Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No.9[23]also reported estimates for COPD risk.It concluded that “The data taken as a whole support the conclusion that cigar smoking can cause COPD in smokers who inhale deeply”.

    Table 4 Individual estimates used in the meta-analyses1

    1Compared with never smoking any tobacco product.2Study name is an identifier assigned by the authors based on the published study name or the name of the first author of the source paper.This identifier is used in the meta-analysis output.3These results were only included in the sensitivity analyses.COPD: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; IHD: Ischaemic heart disease.

    The same Monograph reviews coronary heart disease risk, concluding that “The studies of cigar smoking and coronary events present a pattern of slightly elevated rates among cigar smokers who smoke heavily or inhale deeply”.The Surgeon General’s 1983 report[37]states that “In general, the risk for coronary heart disease mortality of smoking pipes and cigars is substantially lower than the risk of smoking cigarettes.This is generally felt to be due to the tendency of pipe and cigar smokers not to inhale smoke into the lung”.

    For risk of stroke, the Surgeon General’s 1983 report[37]cited results from the United States Veterans study[28](which are included in this review), stating that “Mortality ratios for stroke were near unity for smokers of only cigars or pipes – l.07 and 0.99, respectively.” As noted for lung cancer, there may be differences in stroke risk estimates between studies in the United States and in Europe.Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No.9[23]states “It is difficult to reconcile the results from the European studies and the CPS-I results.The CPS-I primary cigar data are primarily individuals who report that they do not inhale (78 percent), while inhalation information is not provided by the other studies.If inhalation rates are much higher in the European studies, this could explain some of the differences found in the RR of stroke between the two groups of studies.”

    Generally, these results reach conclusions quite similar to ours, and suggest that the conclusions we have drawn from our review of the evidence from the United States may not necessarily apply to cigar smoking in Europe.

    In conclusion, we find that exclusive cigar smoking is associated with a moderate increase in risk of lung cancer, and a smaller increased risk of COPD and IHD, and that these increases in risk are less than for cigarette smoking.

    Table 5 Meta-analysis results for lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, ischaemic heart disease, stroke and circulatory disease for cigar smoking1

    Table 6 Relative risks and 95%CIs by current amount smoked1

    Figure 1 Lung cancer searches.COPD: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

    Figure 2 Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease searches.

    Figure 3 Heart disease, stroke and circulatory disease searches.COPD: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

    ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

    Research background

    Many reviews have studied the relationship of smoking to lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), heart disease and stroke, but the effects on these diseases of cigar smoking, particularly exclusive cigar smoking, have rarely been considered.

    Research motivation

    As the United States is a country with a large population and a relatively high percentage of cigar smokers, we felt that insight into the effects of exclusive cigar smoking could usefully be gained from studies conducted there.

    Research objectives

    To carry out a systematic review of the relationship of exclusive cigar smoking to the four main smoking-related diseases in studies conducted in the United States.

    Research methods

    Literature searches were conducted to identify studies in the United States that reported risk of lung cancer, COPD, heart-disease, stroke and/or overall circulatory disease comparing cigar smokers who had never smoked other tobacco products with those who had never smoked any tobacco.For each study identified as providing relevant results, data were recorded on study characteristics and on the appropriate relative risks (RRs) and 95%CIs relating to overall current, former and ever exclusive cigar use, and, for current smokers, by daily cigar consumption.RRs for a given smoking group and disease were combined using fixed-effect and random-effects meta-analyses.

    Research results

    Data were available on lung cancer from 11 studies, on COPD from four studies and on heart disease, stroke and circulatory disease from 10 studies.As RRs tended to be heterogeneous, random-effects estimates are given below.For current smoking overall RR estimates were 2.98 (95%CI: 2.08 to 4.26, based onn= 6 estimates) for lung cancer, 1.44 (1.16 to 1.77,n= 4) for COPD, 1.11 (1.04 to 1.19,n= 6) for ischaemic heart disease, 1.02 (0.92 to 1.13,n= 5) for stroke and 1.10 (1.05 to 1.16,n= 3) for overall circulatory disease.These RRs are much lower than those reported for the United States for exclusive cigarette smokers; 11.68 for lung cancer, 4.56 for COPD and at least 1.70, depending on age, for ischaemic heart disease.Even for heavy cigar smoking, RRs are generally lower than for overall cigarette smoking.RRs for former and for ever smoking were also much lower than for cigarette smoking.

    Research conclusions

    Although our analyses were based on relatively few studies, some conducted some time ago, the results clearly show that exclusive cigar smoking is associated with an increased risk of lung cancer, though much less than is the case for exclusive cigarette smoking.For COPD and ischaemic heart disease the association is weaker, and also less than for cigarette smoking.No previous study has clarified the effects of exclusive cigarette smoking so clearly.Future research could extend results on exclusive cigar smoking to countries other than the United States, and compare risks of cigar smoking with those of using other nicotine products.

    Research perspectives

    While our results show that exclusive cigar smoking is associated with risks of smoking-related diseases that are much lower than those associated with cigarettes smoking, little of the evidence comes from studies conducted in this millenium.Further large prospective studies are needed to collect more up-to-date results, and to clarify how risk varies by type of cigar smoked.

    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

    We thank Barbara Forey for assistance with the literature searching and study selection, and comments on drafts of the paper, and also John Fry and John Hamling for assistance with conduct of the meta-analyses.We also thank Yvonne Cooper and Diana Morris for typing the various drafts of the paper.

    一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 精品一区二区免费观看| 欧美在线黄色| 久久久久久久久大av| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产| 特级一级黄色大片| 免费av观看视频| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 在线天堂最新版资源| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 国产单亲对白刺激| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 国产真实乱freesex| 夜夜夜夜夜久久久久| www.熟女人妻精品国产| 国产在视频线在精品| 免费观看精品视频网站| 欧美+日韩+精品| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 免费看光身美女| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 欧美性猛交╳xxx乱大交人| 日韩欧美免费精品| 97人妻精品一区二区三区麻豆| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 国内精品一区二区在线观看| 一区二区三区激情视频| 不卡一级毛片| 日韩免费av在线播放| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| 村上凉子中文字幕在线| 国产野战对白在线观看| 深夜a级毛片| 久久这里只有精品中国| 在线观看一区二区三区| 国产三级黄色录像| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 精品久久久久久久久av| eeuss影院久久| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 精品国产亚洲在线| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 午夜视频国产福利| 亚洲在线自拍视频| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 美女 人体艺术 gogo| 亚洲精品久久国产高清桃花| 欧美成人性av电影在线观看| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 长腿黑丝高跟| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲| 国产精品女同一区二区软件 | 免费无遮挡裸体视频| 国产午夜精品论理片| 日日夜夜操网爽| 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 国产高清三级在线| 18+在线观看网站| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看 | 欧美成人a在线观看| 51国产日韩欧美| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 精品国产三级普通话版| av福利片在线观看| 成人国产一区最新在线观看| 日韩成人在线观看一区二区三区| 亚州av有码| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 国产日本99.免费观看| 久久久成人免费电影| 不卡一级毛片| 午夜福利欧美成人| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 性插视频无遮挡在线免费观看| 国产成人aa在线观看| 免费黄网站久久成人精品 | 免费看a级黄色片| 有码 亚洲区| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久 | 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 久久久色成人| 人妻久久中文字幕网| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| av在线观看视频网站免费| a级毛片免费高清观看在线播放| 国产精华一区二区三区| 亚洲男人的天堂狠狠| 国产午夜精品论理片| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 亚州av有码| 嫩草影院新地址| 久久这里只有精品中国| 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| 色综合站精品国产| 国产av不卡久久| 亚洲片人在线观看| 我要看日韩黄色一级片| 一级黄片播放器| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 日韩大尺度精品在线看网址| 人人妻人人看人人澡| 九九在线视频观看精品| 国产91精品成人一区二区三区| 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 亚洲久久久久久中文字幕| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 一a级毛片在线观看| 亚洲av一区综合| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 亚洲一区二区三区不卡视频| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇| 淫秽高清视频在线观看| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 欧美国产日韩亚洲一区| 免费看光身美女| 在线观看66精品国产| 久久国产精品影院| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区 | 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 一区福利在线观看| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| 久99久视频精品免费| 日韩欧美在线二视频| 免费无遮挡裸体视频| 精品国产三级普通话版| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 色视频www国产| 91在线观看av| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 日韩亚洲欧美综合| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 不卡一级毛片| 亚洲综合色惰| 欧美日韩乱码在线| 日韩有码中文字幕| 男女那种视频在线观看| 国产乱人视频| 欧美成人一区二区免费高清观看| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看 | 亚洲一区二区三区色噜噜| 色综合站精品国产| 国产大屁股一区二区在线视频| 中文字幕av成人在线电影| 69人妻影院| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 国产欧美日韩精品一区二区| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 欧美黑人巨大hd| 精品日产1卡2卡| 国产亚洲精品综合一区在线观看| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 午夜福利18| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区| 青草久久国产| 国内久久婷婷六月综合欲色啪| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 亚洲av成人av| 日本一二三区视频观看| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 国产真实乱freesex| 日本熟妇午夜| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 国产成人影院久久av| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 美女黄网站色视频| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 午夜免费激情av| 欧美日本视频| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 级片在线观看| 2021天堂中文幕一二区在线观| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| 成人精品一区二区免费| 国产不卡一卡二| 简卡轻食公司| 午夜两性在线视频| 亚洲av熟女| 脱女人内裤的视频| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 亚洲第一欧美日韩一区二区三区| 国产乱人视频| 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| 美女黄网站色视频| 免费黄网站久久成人精品 | 国产单亲对白刺激| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 欧美黑人巨大hd| 久久久久久久久中文| 久久久成人免费电影| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 成人国产综合亚洲| www.熟女人妻精品国产| 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 99久国产av精品| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 九九久久精品国产亚洲av麻豆| 俺也久久电影网| 国产大屁股一区二区在线视频| 91久久精品电影网| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 亚洲在线观看片| 亚洲成av人片在线播放无| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 一进一出抽搐动态| 小蜜桃在线观看免费完整版高清| 国产高潮美女av| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 99热6这里只有精品| 黄色配什么色好看| 3wmmmm亚洲av在线观看| 欧美日韩乱码在线| 很黄的视频免费| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添av毛片 | 国产一区二区三区视频了| 久久精品影院6| 免费黄网站久久成人精品 | 直男gayav资源| 日本与韩国留学比较| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 伦理电影大哥的女人| 亚洲最大成人av| 国产高清三级在线| 亚洲av.av天堂| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 中文字幕av成人在线电影| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 美女免费视频网站| 国产亚洲欧美98| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 搞女人的毛片| 深爱激情五月婷婷| 亚洲成av人片在线播放无| 欧美精品国产亚洲| www.熟女人妻精品国产| 国产精品av视频在线免费观看| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| 熟女电影av网| www.www免费av| 天天一区二区日本电影三级| 观看美女的网站| 看免费av毛片| 免费高清视频大片| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| 精品国产三级普通话版| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 久久久久亚洲av毛片大全| 久久久国产成人免费| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 欧美黑人巨大hd| 免费看光身美女| 我要看日韩黄色一级片| 国产精品人妻久久久久久| 天堂动漫精品| 国产色婷婷99| 天堂√8在线中文| 观看免费一级毛片| 亚洲av.av天堂| 亚洲男人的天堂狠狠| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看 | 亚洲午夜理论影院| or卡值多少钱| 亚洲午夜理论影院| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| 亚洲国产欧美人成| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 亚洲18禁久久av| 尤物成人国产欧美一区二区三区| 他把我摸到了高潮在线观看| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 国产综合懂色| 国产精品,欧美在线| 国内久久婷婷六月综合欲色啪| 午夜福利欧美成人| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片 | 女人十人毛片免费观看3o分钟| 欧美日韩国产亚洲二区| 久久久久久久午夜电影| 看片在线看免费视频| 十八禁网站免费在线| 午夜久久久久精精品| 美女免费视频网站| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 欧美3d第一页| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 亚洲成av人片在线播放无| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看| 欧美zozozo另类| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| ponron亚洲| 亚洲av熟女| 日本在线视频免费播放| 身体一侧抽搐| 欧美性猛交黑人性爽| 美女高潮的动态| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| 亚洲熟妇熟女久久| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 免费av不卡在线播放| 综合色av麻豆| 国产精品久久久久久久久免 | 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 大型黄色视频在线免费观看| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 亚洲真实伦在线观看| 老司机午夜十八禁免费视频| 日韩欧美国产一区二区入口| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 日本a在线网址| 国产探花极品一区二区| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 亚洲精品影视一区二区三区av| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 欧美成人一区二区免费高清观看| 一区二区三区激情视频| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 亚洲一区二区三区色噜噜| 日韩欧美精品免费久久 | 日韩亚洲欧美综合| 久久热精品热| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 国产av在哪里看| 国产亚洲欧美98| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区 | 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区| 老司机午夜福利在线观看视频| 丁香欧美五月| 久久伊人香网站| 他把我摸到了高潮在线观看| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片va | 黄片小视频在线播放| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 亚洲激情在线av| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 国产精品,欧美在线| av在线老鸭窝| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 欧美最黄视频在线播放免费| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 人妻制服诱惑在线中文字幕| 中国美女看黄片| 国产视频一区二区在线看| 日韩欧美精品免费久久 | 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 久久国产乱子免费精品| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 丰满人妻一区二区三区视频av| 国产成人a区在线观看| 久久精品影院6| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 搞女人的毛片| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 最近在线观看免费完整版| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 一级黄片播放器| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看| 国内精品久久久久精免费| 成年女人永久免费观看视频| 亚洲无线观看免费| 夜夜爽天天搞| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 欧美极品一区二区三区四区| 我的女老师完整版在线观看| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 我要看日韩黄色一级片| 少妇高潮的动态图| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 日韩免费av在线播放| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 亚洲成人中文字幕在线播放| 一本精品99久久精品77| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 国产精品人妻久久久久久| 一夜夜www| 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡| 久久性视频一级片| 国产三级中文精品| 欧美极品一区二区三区四区| 亚州av有码| 看片在线看免费视频| 我要搜黄色片| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 美女免费视频网站| 观看免费一级毛片| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 国产毛片a区久久久久| 天天一区二区日本电影三级| 亚洲av美国av| av黄色大香蕉| av欧美777| 99久国产av精品| 国产野战对白在线观看| 一级黄片播放器| 国产乱人视频| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 久久精品91蜜桃| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区 | 国产在视频线在精品| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 嫩草影视91久久| 久久久国产成人免费| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久 | av在线天堂中文字幕| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 99精品在免费线老司机午夜| 免费高清视频大片| 中文字幕久久专区| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕 | 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频| 美女黄网站色视频| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 天堂动漫精品| 日日夜夜操网爽| 色哟哟·www| 午夜视频国产福利| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 淫秽高清视频在线观看| 一本综合久久免费| 啪啪无遮挡十八禁网站| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 色精品久久人妻99蜜桃| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 亚洲成av人片免费观看| 我的老师免费观看完整版| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 欧美又色又爽又黄视频| 99热6这里只有精品| 国产野战对白在线观看| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 亚洲成人中文字幕在线播放| 内地一区二区视频在线| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 99热这里只有是精品50| 哪里可以看免费的av片| 日日夜夜操网爽| 舔av片在线| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 两个人视频免费观看高清| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 男女视频在线观看网站免费| 麻豆成人av在线观看| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 老熟妇仑乱视频hdxx| xxxwww97欧美| 亚洲成人中文字幕在线播放| 欧美极品一区二区三区四区| 热99在线观看视频| 又爽又黄a免费视频| 日韩欧美三级三区| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕 | 男女那种视频在线观看| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 午夜福利欧美成人| 亚洲精品乱码久久久v下载方式| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄 | 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 国产真实乱freesex| 中文字幕av成人在线电影| 熟女人妻精品中文字幕| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 欧美又色又爽又黄视频| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 精品人妻视频免费看| 校园春色视频在线观看| 国产伦精品一区二区三区视频9| 精品久久久久久久久久久久久| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 亚洲在线观看片| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 亚洲成av人片在线播放无| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 亚洲精品久久国产高清桃花| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 97碰自拍视频| 亚洲精品456在线播放app | 97超视频在线观看视频| 亚洲三级黄色毛片| 日本a在线网址| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 日韩欧美在线二视频| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 久久香蕉精品热| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 波多野结衣高清作品| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 精品一区二区三区视频在线| 日韩中字成人| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 午夜影院日韩av| 国产色婷婷99| 男女视频在线观看网站免费| 国产av在哪里看| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 日本a在线网址| 久久热精品热| 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清| 人妻夜夜爽99麻豆av| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 听说在线观看完整版免费高清| 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 淫秽高清视频在线观看| 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片 | 成年免费大片在线观看| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 无人区码免费观看不卡| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 午夜激情欧美在线| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 成人高潮视频无遮挡免费网站| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 国产91精品成人一区二区三区| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 熟女人妻精品中文字幕| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 中文字幕精品亚洲无线码一区| 99热只有精品国产| 99久久九九国产精品国产免费| aaaaa片日本免费| 天堂√8在线中文| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 91麻豆av在线|