Project description:BackgroundSevere coronavirus-induced disease 2019 (COVID-19) leads to acute respiratory distress syndrome with an increased risk of venous thrombo-embolic events. To a much lesser extent, arterial thrombo-embolic events have also been reported in this setting.Case summaryHere, we describe four different cases of COVID-19 infection with ischaemic arterial events, such as a myocardial infarction with high thrombus load, ischaemic stroke on spontaneous thrombosis of the aortic valve, floating thrombus with mesenteric, splenic and renal infarction, and acute limb ischaemia.DiscussionCardiovascular risk factors such as hypertension, obesity, and diabetes are comorbidities most frequently found in patients with a severe COVID-19 infection and are associated with a higher death rate. Our goal is to provide an overview of the clinical spectrum of ischaemic arterial events that may either reveal or complicate COVID-19. Several suspected pathophysiological mechanisms could explain the association between cardiovascular events and COVID-19 (role of systemic inflammatory response syndrome, endothelial dysfunction, activation of coagulation cascade leading to a hypercoagulability state, virus-induced secondary antiphospholipid syndrome). We need additional studies of larger size, to estimate the incidence of these arterial events and to assess the efficacy of anticoagulation therapy.
Project description:The global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to the rapid development of vaccines against this disease. Despite the success of the international vaccination program, adverse events following vaccination, and the mechanisms behind them, remain poorly understood. Here we present four cases of death following receipt of a second dose of COVID-19 vaccine, with no obvious cause identified at autopsy. Using RNA sequencing, we identified genes that were differentially expressed between our post-vaccination cases and a control group that died of blood loss and strangulation. Three hundred and ninety genes were found to be upregulated and 115 genes were downregulated in post-vaccination cases compared with controls. Importantly, genes involved in neutrophil degranulation and cytokine signaling were upregulated. Our results suggest that immune dysregulation occurred following vaccination. Careful observation and care may be necessary if an abnormally high fever exceeding 40°C occurs after vaccination, even with antipyretic drugs.
Project description:BackgroundAs more people become vaccinated against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, reports of delayed cutaneous hypersensitivity reactions are beginning to emerge.MethodsIn this IRB-approved retrospective case series, biopsy specimens of potential cutaneous adverse reactions from the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna mRNA vaccine were identified and reviewed. Clinical information was obtained through the requisition form, referring clinician, or medical chart review.ResultsTwelve cases were included. Histopathological features from two injection-site reactions showed a mixed-cell infiltrate with eosinophils and a spongiotic dermatitis with eosinophils. Three biopsy specimens came from generalized eruptions that showed interface changes consistent with an exanthematous drug reaction. Three biopsy specimens revealed a predominantly spongiotic pattern, consistent with eczematous dermatitis. Small-vessel vascular injury was seen in two specimens, which were diagnosed as urticarial vasculitis and leukocytoclastic vasculitis, respectively. There were two cases of new-onset bullous pemphigoid supported by histopathological examination and direct immunofluorescence studies. Eosinophils were seen in 10 cases.ConclusionsDermatopathologists should be aware of potential cutaneous adverse reactions to mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines. Histopathological patterns include mixed-cell infiltrates, epidermal spongiosis, and interface changes. Eosinophils are a common finding but are not always present. Direct immunofluorescence studies may be helpful for immune-mediated cutaneous presentations such as vasculitis or bullous pemphigoid.
Project description:Intersubject variability in drug response, whether related to efficacy or toxicity, is well recognized clinically. Over the years, drug selection from our pharmacologic armamentarium has moved from providers' preferred choices to more personalized treatments as clinicians' decisions are guided by data from clinical trials. Since the advent of more accessible and affordable pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing, the promise of precise pharmacotherapy has been made. Results have accumulated in the literature with numerous examples demonstrating the value of PGx to improve drug response or prevent drug toxicity. Unfortunately, limited availability of reimbursement policies has dampened the enthusiasm of providers and organizations. The clinical application of PGx knowledge remains difficult for most clinicians under real-world conditions in patients with numerous chronic conditions and polypharmacy. This may be due to phenoconversion, a condition where there is a discrepancy between the genotype-predicted phenotype and the observed phenotype. This condition complicates the interpretation of PGx results and may lead to inappropriate recommendations and clinical decision making. For this reason, regulatory agencies have limited the transfer of information from PGx laboratories directly to consumers, especially recommendations about the use of certain drugs. This mini-review presents cases (mexiletine, propafenone, clopidogrel, warfarin, codeine, procainamide) from historical observations where drug response was modified by phenoconversion. The cases illustrate, from decades ago, that we are still in great need of advanced clinical decision systems that cope with conditions associated with phenoconversion, especially in patients with polypharmacy.
Project description:Background: The purpose of the study was to compare trends in the progression of COVID-19 among South Asian countries with more developed Western countries. Methods: COVID-19 data from South Asian countries were used for this observational study. Data were taken up to April 21, 2020 from the outbreak of the COVID-19. Four of the seven countries met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Results: An exponential increase in the average number of weekly cases was reported after the fifth week following the first case. The correlation between reported cases and tests was found to be strong and significant (r=0.90, p=0.037). However, on average, 315.25 tests per million population were performed, which was at least 12 times lower than the number of tests performed in countries with a large number of COVID-19 cases. Conclusions: At present, the number of confirmed cases from South Asia was found to be significantly lower than in Western countries. Hence, an increase in the strength of performing diagnostic tests is highly recommended. Strict measures are required to make the people of these countries follow the instructions of social distancing and comply with preventive measures.
Project description:The 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI coronary artery disease revascularization guideline highlights the importance of the multidisciplinary heart team in making patient-centered, evidence-based clinical decisions for patients considered for coronary revascularization. We present 2 cases highlighting aspects of heart team decision making for complex patients with coronary artery disease. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.).
Project description:BackgroundSome patients with FND and FEVD cannot re-establish walking ability with standard treatment alone.CasesNovel invasive treatment of FEVD trialed in three females, aged 19, 30 and 33 years with >18 month history of FND. None could walk and all were wheelchair-dependent needing home carers. Standard treatment plus novel step-wise escalation of invasive "intervention+" was individually tailored to correct FEVD; functional electrical stimulation, botulinum toxin injections, tibial nerve block, serial casting, and for Case 3, manipulation under anesthetic and surgical tendon lengthening. All regained walking ability and discontinued carers. Case 1 resumed dancing and Case 3 returned to employment. Improvements were largely maintained at 3 and 6 month follow-up.ConclusionsAs a last resort, invasive adjuncts may be considered in a very small proportion of FND patients who fail to regain walking ability with standard treatment alone and reach a "dead end" where no further progress is feasible.
Project description:BackgroundVaccination is a key intervention to prevent COVID-19. Many vaccines are administered globally, yet there is not much evidence regarding their safety and adverse effects. Iran also faces this challenge, especially as data regarding the Sputnik V vaccine is sparse. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine the adverse effects of the most commonly used vaccines in Iran.MethodsUsing a retrospective cohort study design, 6600 subjects aged 18 years or older who had received two doses of any of the three COVID-19 vaccines (Sinopharm, AstraZeneca, and Sputnik V) were selected using a random sampling method between March and August 2021. Subjects were asked about any adverse effects of the vaccines by trained interviewers via telephone interview. Vaccine-related adverse effects in individuals during the first 72 h and subsequently following both doses of the vaccines were determined. The demographic variables, type of administered vaccine, adverse effects, and history of the previous infection with COVID-19 were collected. Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation) and analytical statistics (Chi-squared and Wilcoxon tests) were performed at a 95% significance level using STATA software version 15 (STATA Corp, College Station, TX, USA).ResultsFrom 6600 participants, 4775 responded (response rate = 72.3%). Of the participants, 1460 (30.6%) received the AstraZeneca vaccine, 1564 (32.8%) received the Sinopharm vaccine and 1751 (36.7%) received the Sputnik V vaccine. 2653 participants (55.56%) reported adverse effects after the first dose and 1704 (35.7%) after the second dose. Sputnik V caused the most adverse effects with 1449 (82.7%) vaccine recipients reporting symptoms after the first or second dose, compared with 1030 (70.5%) for AstraZeneca and only 585 (37.4%) for the Sinopharm vaccine. The most common adverse effects after the first dose were fatigue (28.37%), chill/fever (26.86%), and skeletal pain (22.38%). These three adverse effects were the same for the second dose, although their prevalence was lower.ConclusionsIn this study, we demonstrate that the Sputnik V vaccine has the highest rate of adverse effects, followed by the AstraZeneca and Sinopharm vaccines. COVID-19 vaccines used in Iran are safe and there were no reports of serious adverse effects.