Revisiting echocardiographic features of prosthetic heart valves: the necessity of correct differentiation of mono-leaflet vs. bileaflet mechanical heart valves in a case report.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical heart valve replacement is a standard treatment for severe valvular disorders. The use of mono-leaflet valves has decreased recently. Recognizing the echocardiographic features of mono-leaflet and bileaflet valves is crucial for accurate complication diagnosis and proper management. CASE PRESENTATION: A 65-year-old female with mono-leaflet mitral and bileaflet tricuspid valves underwent an echocardiographic assessment. This simple educational case provides a unique opportunity to compare the echocardiographic features of these valves within a single patient. CONCLUSION: There is a crucial need for clinicians, particularly those in training, to differentiate between mono-leaflet and bileaflet mechanical heart valves adeptly. With mono-leaflet valves decreasing in prevalence, proficiency in recognizing the echocardiographic nuances of each type is imperative. Failure to do so may result in misdiagnoses and inappropriate management. This underscores the significance of continuous education and vigilance in echocardiographic assessments to ensure optimal patient care.

Immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with diabetes mellitus: A systematic review.

Purpose: To evaluate the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) through a systematic approach. Method: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science with no time restrictions. The search was based on the three main concepts: Covid-19, Vaccine immunogenicity and Diabetes Mellitus. Results: After excluding irrelevant studies, 16 studies remained for the quantitative assay. Among the sixteen studies, eleven had controls. Type of diabetes was specifically mentioned in six studies (T2DM; n=4, T1DM and T2DM; n=2). Twelve of the included studies were conducted on the immunogenicity of vaccines that included mRNA vaccines (i.e. BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) in DM, five studies included vector-based vaccines (i.e. Ad5-nCoV and ChAdOx1-S), and five studies assessed the immunogenicity of vaccines in DM, including inactivated vaccines (i.e. BBV-152, CoronaVac, Sinopharm or SinoVac). Most of the current studies indicate lower antibody response in patients with DM compared to individuals without DM, after the second dose of vaccine and irrespective of vaccine type. Several studies have shown that higher age and higher BMI are associated with lower antibody response, while optimum glycemic control and higher GFR are associated with higher antibody response among patients with DM. Conclusion: Immunogenicity of the vaccines has mostly been reported to be lower among patients with DM compared to healthy controls. There are also few studies assessing variables that significantly affect this association, including age, type of diabetes, BMI, glycemic control and eGFR. Investigating these associations could help us provide the most advantageous condition for patients with DM before, during and after vaccination for optimum antibody response. Many unresolved issues concerning potential factors affecting vaccine immunogenicity, including type of vaccine, numbers of administered doses, re-vaccination intervals and hyperglycemia in patients with DM need to be addressed through future research.