Acute myocardial infarction and myocarditis following COVID-19 vaccination.

Emerging reports raise concerns on the potential association between the COVID-19 vaccines and cardiac manifestations. We sought to evaluate cardiac complications associated with COVID-19 vaccination in a pooled analysis from our institution's cohort study and systematic review. Consecutive patients admitted to a tertiary hospital in Singapore between 1 January 2021 and 31 March 2021, with the onset of cardiac manifestations within 14 days following COVID-19 vaccination, were studied. Furthermore, a systematic review was performed, with PubMed, Embase, Research Square, MedRxiv and LitCovid databases accessed from inception up to 29 June 2021. Relevant manuscripts reporting individual patient data on cardiac complications following COVID-19 vaccination were included. Thirty patients were included in the study cohort, with 29 diagnosed with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and 1 with myocarditis. Five patients developed heart failure, two had cardiogenic shock, three intubated, and one had cardiovascular-related mortality. In the systematic review, 16 studies were included with 41 myocarditis and 6 AMI cases. In the pooled analysis of the study cohort and the systematic review, 35 patients had AMI and 42 had myocarditis. Majority were men, and myocarditis patients were younger than AMI patients. Myocarditis patients tended to present 72 h postvaccination, while AMI patients were older and typically presented 24 h postvaccination. Majority with AMI or myocarditis developed symptoms after the first and second vaccination dose, respectively. This pooled analysis of patients presenting with cardiac manifestations following COVID-19 vaccination highlights the differences between myocarditis and AMI presentations in temporal association with the vaccination.

Disparity in female and Asian representation amongst cardiology journal editorial boards members: a call for empowerment.

BACKGROUND: While progress is evident in gender and ethnic representation in the workplace, this disparity remains prevalent in academic positions. OBJECTIVES: We examined gender and Asian ethnic representation in editorial boards of cardiology journals. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using publicly available data on Cardiology and Cardiovascular medicine journals in the first quartile of the 2020 Scimago Journal & Country Rank indicator. The proportions of female and Asian editorial board members, associate editors and editors-in-chief were assessed. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the journal's geographical origin, subspecialty and demographic of the editor-in-chief. RESULTS: Seventy-six cardiology journals, involving 8915 editorial board members, were included. Only 19.6% of editorial board members were female, 20.8% Asians and 4.0% Asian females. There were less female representation amongst editors-in-chief (9.9%) compared to associate editors (22.3%). European (18.1%) and North American-based journals (21.1%) had higher female representation compared to Asian-based journals (8.7%). There was lower Asian representation in European (18.1%) and North American-based journals (19.9%) compared to Asian-based journals (72.3%). Females were underrepresented in interventional (14.5%) journals, while Asians were underrepresented in general cardiology (18.3%) and heart failure (18.3%) journals. Journals led by female editors-in-chief had significantly higher female representation compared to male-led ones, while journals with Asian editors-in-chief had greater Asian representation compared to non-Asian led ones. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the female and Asian ethnic underrepresentation in academic roles in cardiology journal editorial boards. Further analysis is needed for other ethnicities, while the community pushes towards gender-balanced and ethnic diversity across editorial boards.