Understanding the pattern and severity of myocarditis caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) vaccine is imperative for improving the care of the patients, and cardiac evaluation by MRI plays a key role in this regard. Our systematic review and meta‐analysis aimed to summarize cardiac MRI findings in COVID‐19 vaccine‐related myocarditis. We performed a comprehensive systematic review of literature in PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases using key terms covering COVID‐19 vaccine, myocarditis, and cardiac MRI. Individual‐level patient data (IPD) and aggregated‐level data (AD) studies were pooled through a two‐stage analysis method. For this purpose, all IPD were first gathered into a single data set and reduced to AD, and then this AD (from IPD studies) was pooled with existing AD (from the AD studies) using fixed/random effect models. I 2 was used to assess the degree of heterogeneity, and the prespecified level of statistical significance ( P value for heterogeneity) was <0.1. Based on meta‐analysis of 102 studies ( n = 468 patients), 79% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 54%–97%) of patients fulfilled Lake Louise criteria (LLC) for diagnosis of myocarditis. Cardiac MRI abnormalities included elevated T2 in 72% (95% CI: 50%–90%), myocardial late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) in 93% (95% CI: 83%–99%; nearly all with a subepicardial and/or midwall pattern), impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (<50%) in 4% (95% CI: 1.0%–9.0%). Moreover, elevated T1 and extracellular volume fraction (ECV) (>30), reported only by some IPD studies, were detected in 74.5% (76/102) and 32% (16/50) of patients, respectively. In conclusion, our findings may suggest that over two‐thirds of patients with clinically suspected myocarditis following COVID‐19 vaccination meet the LLC. COVID‐19 vaccine‐associated myocarditis may show a similar pattern compared to other acute myocarditis entities. Notably, preserved LVEF is probably a common finding in these patients. Evidence Level 4 Technical Efficacy Stage 3

Background: Currently, no pharmacological or device-based intervention has been fully proven to reverse the no-reflow phenomenon. Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of intracoronary (IC) epinephrine in the management of no-reflow phenomenon following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), either as first-line treatment or after the failure of conventional agents. Design: Systematic review. Data sources and methods: PubMed and Scopus databases were systematically searched up to 28 May 2022, with additional manual search on the Google Scholar and review of the reference lists of the relevant studies to identify all published studies. Cohort studies, case series, and interventional studies written in English which evaluated the efficacy and safety of IC epinephrine in patients with no-flow phenomenon were included in our review. Results: Six of the 646 articles identified in the initial search met our inclusion criteria. IC epinephrine was used either as a first-line treatment [two randomized clinical trials (RCTs)] or after the failure of conventional agents (two cohort studies and two case series) for restoring the coronary flow, mainly after primary PCI. As first-line therapy, IC epinephrine successfully restored coronary flow in over 90% of patients in both RCTs, which significantly outperformed IC adenosine (78%) but lagged behind combination of verapamil and tirofiban (100%) in this regard. In the refractory no-flow phenomenon, successful reperfusion [thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade = 3] was achieved in three out of four patients after the administration of IC epinephrine based on the results from both case series. Their findings were confirmed by a recent cohort study that further compared IC epinephrine with IC adenosine and found significant differences between them in terms of efficacy [% TIMI flow grade 3: (69.1% versus 52.7%, respectively; p value = 0.04)] and 1-year major adverse cardiac event (MACE) outcomes (11.3% versus 26.7%, respectively; p value ⩽ 0.01). Overall, malignant ventricular arrhythmias were reported in none of the patients treated with IC epinephrine. Conclusion: Results from available evidence suggest that IC epinephrine might be an effective and safe agent in managing the no-reflow phenomenon.

No abstract

BackgroundCombined immune deficiencies (CIDs) with associated or syndromic features are a highly heterogeneous subgroup of inherited immune disorders. These patients represent specific clinical complications with an increased risk of autoimmune conditions.MethodsWe analyzed data of monogenic patients with syndromic CIDs adopted from the Iranian inborn errors of immunity registry up to January 2022. A comprehensive comparison in terms of demographic, clinical, and immunological features was performed between patients with and without autoimmunity and also among four mutation groups with the most registered cases including ATM, STAT3 (AD-LOF), DNMT3B/ZBTB24, and WAS mutations.ResultsA total of 137 patients with monogenic syndromic CIDs were included. Most commonly mutated genes were the ATM [80 (58.4%)] and STAT3 (AD-LOF) [19 (13.9%)], followed by DNMT3B [11 (8%)], and WAS [11 (8%)]. More than 18% of all patients with syndromic CIDs, including most DNMT3B/ZBTB24 mutations patients, were clinically diagnosed with antibody deficiencies before genetic evaluation. Patients with ATM and WAS mutations had the latest age of onset and the lowest age of diagnosis, respectively. Autoimmune disorders were diagnosed in 24 patients at a median age of 3.5 (2.6-6.0) years, 70.6% of which were diagnosed prior to the diagnosis of immunodeficiency. Lymphoproliferation, particularly hepatosplenomegaly, was significantly higher in patients with autoimmunity (p=0.004). Syndromic CID patients with autoimmunity had significantly lower IgG levels. Hematologic autoimmunity mainly immune thrombocytopenic purpura was the most frequent autoimmunity among major groups of ATM, STAT3 (AD-LOF), DNMT3B/ZBTB24, and WAS mutations, however ATM-mutated patients present more diversified involved organs including rheumatologic, gastrointestinal and dermatologic autoimmunity.ConclusionAbout 18% of patients with monogenic syndromic CIDs developed autoimmunity, mainly in the form of hematological immune diseases. Autoimmunity could be an early-onset involvement with a potential diagnostic impact on suspicious cases of syndromic CIDs.

No abstract