During the spread of an increasing number of new variants of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome CoronaVirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), it is extremely important not only to assess the immunogenicity and efficacy, butalso the safety of various combinations of vaccines. Excessive immune response and associated signs and symptoms may occur with varying frequency as expected from the use of vaccines.Aim. To compare the reactogenicity of various (heterologous and homologous) vaccination regimens in a prospective observational study.Material and methods. In individuals aged ≥18 years, in the absence of contraindications to vaccination, two types of vaccines were used at primary vaccination and revaccination: Gam-COVID-Vac and CoviVac: group I (n=97) — Gam-COVID-Vac at each stage of primary and booster vaccination ; group II (n=7) — Gam-COVID-Vck at each stage of primary vaccination, CoviVac at each stage of revaccination; group III (n=42) — CoviVac at each stage of primary vaccination, Gam-COVID-Vac at each stage of revaccination; group IV (n=38) — CoviVac at each stage of primary and secondary vaccination. In all participants, the dynamics of IgG to SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein receptor-binding domain and T-cell immunity to SARS-CoV-2 were determined over time. To control the plasma hemostasis, the method of dynamic thrombophotometry was used. Local and systemic adverse events were assessed.Results. The number of vaccinated individuals with a rise in body temperature above 370 C after the 1st stage of revaccination was significantly (p<0,05) more in group I (37,5%) and group II (57,1%) compared with vaccinated persons of IV group. At the same time, after the 2nd stage of revaccination, in general, a smaller percentage of vaccinated persons with hyperthermia was noted. In group I, a higher percentage of persons (22,9%) complaining of the appearance of weakness after stage I of revaccination was noted compared to vaccinated persons of group IV — 5,2%. An increase in the fibrin clot growth rate was noted in group III at the stage of revaccination.Conclusion. The use of various revaccination schemes (homologous and heterologous) was not associated with the development of serious adverse events. The resulting local and systemic reactions were shortlived and did not require hospitalization. More pronounced systemic reactions were noted in the form of a short-term fever and weakness when using the Gam-COVID-Vac. No cases of arterial or venous thrombosis were registered during the follow-up period.

Aim. To study clinical, medical history and paraclinical characteristics of patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Material and methods. The study included 209 patients with NSTEMI who were admitted to the Demikhov City Clinical Hospital (Moscow). The patients were divided into 2 groups: the experimental one (n=104)  — those after COVID-19, the control one (n=105)  — those without history of COVID-19. All patients underwent routine diagnostic investigations in accordance with current standards and clinical guidelines.Results. The mean age of patients in the experimental group was 61,8±12,2 years, while in the control one — 69,0±13,0 years (p<0,0001). Myocardial infarction developed 49 days [34.0; 82.0] after COVID-19. Prior exertional angina was observed in 76,9% of patients in the experimental group and in 88,6% in the control one (χ2 =4,97; p=0,0258). The level of C-reactive protein in the experimental group was 19,2 mg/l [4,9; 53,0], and in the control one — 5,6 mg/l [0,4; 21,8] (p=0,0007). The average troponin I level in the experimental group was 2,7 ng/ml [1,3; 8,0], while in the control one — 1,8 ng/ml [0,8; 3,5] (p=0,0091).Conclusion. Patients with NSTEMI after COVID-19 were significantly younger compared to patients without a history of COVID-19. They had less common exertional angina prior to MI, while C-reactive protein and troponin I levels were significantly higher than in the control group. In addition, in NSTEMI patients after COVID-19, the estimated pulmonary artery systolic pressure was significantly higher compared to patients without a history of COVID-19.

No abstract

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic remains one of the most urgent problems for healthcare professionals due to the variety of non-pulmonary manifestations. Along with the respiratory syndrome in a significant proportion of patients, the disease course is accompanied by pronounced systemic inflammatory response and hemostasis changes. This is associated with a high risk of complications, especially in patients with concomitant cardiovascular pathology. The aim of the study was to analyze and systematize the literature data on the pathogenesis, clinical course, and outcomes of myocardial infarction (MI) in patients with COVID-19. For review, publications indexed in the PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Cyberleninka databases were used. The search depth was 2 years, starting from 2020. The review is based on summarized data from the most relevant clinical studies, reports and systematic reviews. The literature analysis made it possible to conclude that the published data on MI in patients with COVID-19 are currently contradictory. Multiple thrombosis, sepsis, macrophage activation, increasing hypoxemia, imbalance between myocardial oxygen supply and demand in patients with severe COVID-19 have led to a high incidence of type 1 and type 2 MI. It should be especially noted that in a number of cases, MI with COVID-19 occurs in patients with intact coronary arteries, and its course is associated with a high incidence of complications, which, in turn, leads to a significant increase in short- and mid-term mortality.

No abstract