Endothelial nitric oxide synthase Asp298Glu (894G/T) gene polymorphism as a possible risk factor for the coronary slow flow phenomenon among Iranians.

BACKGROUND: Mounting evidence indicates an association between endothelial dysfunction and the coronary slow flow phenomenon (CSFP). In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the possible role of endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) 894G/T and interleukin-1ß (IL-1ß) 315C/T polymorphisms as possible risk factors for CSFP. METHODS: This prospective study enrolled patients with CSFP and individuals with normal coronary arteries. Genotypes were assessed using regular polymerase chain reaction and direct Sanger-sequencing techniques. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 267 individuals: 180 patients with CSFP (49 women [27.2%]) at a median age of 55 (48-62) years and 87 controls with normal coronary arteries (56 women [64.4%]) at a median age of 47 (41-58) years. The allelic distribution of eNOS 894G/T was significantly associated with CSFP (odds ratio [OR], 1.58; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04-2.42; P = 0.03). This polymorphism increased the risk of CSFP under the dominant model (OR 1.73; 95% CI I.02-2.95; P = 0.04). However, the allelic frequencies (1.05; 95% CI 0.68-1.59; P = 0.83) and genotypic frequencies (0.88; 95% CI 0.52-1.49; P = 0.63) of the IL-1ß 315C/T polymorphism were not associated with the incidence of CSFP in the Iranian population. CONCLUSIONS: The CSFP and control groups were statistically different regarding the eNOS 894G/T polymorphism. Our findings also demonstrated that the IL-1ß 315C/T polymorphism was not a risk factor for CSFP.

COVID-19 Associated Fulminant Myocarditis in a Fully-Vaccinated Female: A Case Report with Clinical Follow-up.

Background: Myocarditis is considered a serious adverse event after COVID-19 infection. The risk and severity of myocarditis after COVID-19 disease decreased significantly in the vaccinated population. We present a case of cardiac magnetic resonance proven fulminant myocarditis following COVID-19 disease in a young female who was previously vaccinated with 2 doses of the BIBP (Sinopharm) vaccine. Case summary: A 29-year-old female was referred to the hospital with acute chest pain, dyspnea, and nausea. Her electrocardiogram revealed ST-segment elevation in anterolateral leads with reciprocal changes in inferior leads. She was primarily diagnosed with ST-elevation myocardial infarction following spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) according to her age and gender. Her coronary angiography was normal. RT-PCR nasopharyngeal swab was positive for SARS-COV-2 infection. According to her history and excluding coronary artery diseases, she was clinically diagnosed with myocarditis and received corticosteroids, IVIG, and colchicine. She was discharged in a favorable condition after 11 days of hospitalization. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging confirmed the diagnosis of myocarditis according to the updated lake Louise criteria. On her 4-month follow-up, she was asymptomatic, and her echocardiography showed improvement in biventricular function. Discussion: The diagnosis of myocarditis caused by COVID-19 infection may be challenging as the symptoms of myocarditis, and COVID-19 disease may overlap. It should be considered when patients have acute chest pain, palpitation, elevated cardiac biomarkers, and new abnormalities in ECG or echocardiography. Cardiac MRI is a non-invasive gold standard modality for diagnosing and follow-up of myocarditis and should be used in clinically suspected myocarditis. The long-term course of myocarditis following COVID-19 disease is still unclear, but some evidence suggests it may have a favorable mid-term outcome.

A Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Eptifibatide Bolus Only Versus Bolus Plus Infusion In Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention For ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUNDS: The use of eptifibatide combined with heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is recommended to be followed by continuous infusion. Recently, there are some suggestions that using bolus only may be sufficient and cost-effective but randomized trials are lacking. AIMS: The goal of this study was to evaluate these two approaches in a double-blinded randomized control trial. METHODS: The primary PCI patients who received bolus eptifibatide were randomized to 75 mg IV eptifibatide infusion or placebo blindly. The patients were followed up for the primary outcome of vascular or bleeding complications and secondary outcome of ischemic complications. RESULTS: 330 patients (165 from each group) completed the study. The mean age was 57.67 ± 11.53 years and 77.3 % were male. Major bleeding was seen in 1 patient in each group. Hematoma occurred in 8.5 %. The relative risk of hematoma and ecchymosis in bolus plus infusion group to bolus only group were 0.988 (95 % CI: 0.486-2.006) and 1.032 (95 % CI: 0.729-1.459). Multivariate analysis confirmed no significant differences in the bleeding event. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in in-hospital death or any ischemic events. (Cath lab death: 1.4 % in bolus only vs zero % in the control group, p = 0.217, stent thrombosis was seen in one patient in each group). CONCLUSION: There were no differences in the risk of access site ecchymosis, hematoma or major bleeding. Ischemic events and stent thrombosis rates were also similar. Our study suggests that using eptifibatide bolus only during PCI of patients with STEMI is safe and can be cost-saving.