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.

PurposeAlthough previous investigations revealed favourable in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 vaccine-related myocarditis, the mid-term prognosis is still unclear. Hence, we aim to summarise existing evidence on the follow-up imaging and clinical findings in patients with COVID-19 vaccine-related myocarditis.MethodsWe performed a systematic search in online databases using relevant key terms covering COVID-19 vaccine, myocarditis, follow-up, and cardiac MRI. We included all observational studies that reported cardiac MRI findings of patients with myocarditis following COVID-19 vaccination in both acute and follow-up phases. Data on clinical outcomes and cardiac MRI findings were extracted and pooled using a random-effect model.ResultsA total of 27 studies (126 patients) met our eligibility criteria. At the time of follow-up, myocarditis symptoms were resolved in all patients, but abnormal electrocardiography and elevated troponin levels were detected in 18.7% and 3.8% of them, respectively. Median imaging follow-up times varied from 3 to 6.3 months. On follow-up cardiac MRI, the persistence of LGE was observed in 76% (95%CI: 62 to 85%), but its extension declined compared to the baseline in almost all patients. Persistent LGE was accompanied by myocardial edoema in six patients, and it was consistent with myocardial fibrosis (LGE without edoema) in the remaining cases. Mean changes (95%CI) of cardiac MRI left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (%) was +2.97 (+1.59 to +4.34) from baseline.ConclusionIn conclusion, although most patients likely experience favourable clinical outcomes without serious complications, cardiac MRI abnormalities, mainly LGE, may persist in a notable proportion of them beyond the acute phase.

Backgrounds: Myasthenia Gravis (MG), a chronic neuromuscular junction disorder, emerged as one of the serious side effects of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. We aimed to summarize the findings of studies on the clinical features and outcomes of COVID-19 vaccination-associated MG. Methods: We performed a systematic search on 3 databases, Medline, Embase, and Scopus, using the query “COVID-19 vaccine” and “Myasthenia Gravis.” Patients’ data, including clinical data, MG subtype, vaccine type, and vaccine dose number, were extracted from the eligible studies. Results: A total of 20 COVID-19 vaccination-related MGs have been reported worldwide. The median (interquartile range) age was 64 (51, 75) years; 85% (17/20) of them were male, and 70% (14/20) of patients had received messenger RNA-based vaccines. The most common symptoms, in order of frequency, were binocular diplopia (8/11) and ptosis (4/11); the median (interquartile range) time from vaccine to MG symptoms was 6 (2, 7.5) days. Repetitive nerve stimulation showed abnormal decrement in 85% (11/13) of patients, and all 4 patients getting single-fiber electromyography showed an abnormal finding. Nine out of twelve patients with data on clinical outcomes experienced partial/complete improvement of symptoms within 1 month. Conclusion: MG cases after the COVID-19 vaccine are more likely to occur among males and adults older than 50 years. Our pooled cohort data suggest MG symptoms appear within 2 weeks after receiving the vaccine. The presenting symptoms in MG cases associated with COVID-19 vaccine are possibly similar to non-vaccination related MGs. Most patients are expected to experience partial/complete improvement within 1 month.