BACKGROUND:Despite optimal therapy, coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a significant public health concern worldwide. Studies have increasingly recognized the role of inflammation in atherosclerosis. Colchicine, a potent anti-inflammatory drug commonly used to treat gout, and pericarditis is being evaluated in this study for its safety and efficacy in preventing CAD following an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS:We searched PubMed and Embase for studies up to April 2024 comparing colchicine to standard medical treatment in ACS patients. Primary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and recurrent ACS, while secondary outcomes were cardiovascular death, congestive heart failure (CHF), stroke, hospitalizations, and gastrointestinal (GI) side effects. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. RESULTS:We included nine studies with a pooled sample size of 7260 patients. The mean age was 60.1 (±11.8) years, with 19.3 % females and a mean follow-up duration of 8.5 (±6) months. Patients who received colchicine treatment demonstrated a reduced risk of re-hospitalizations (OR 0.52 [0.34-0.81]) but had increased GI effects (OR 2.10 [1.20-3.68]). There was no significant difference in cardiovascular death (OR 1.17 [0.52-2.63]), MACE (OR 0.68 [0.45-1.01]), stroke (OR 0.46 [0.18-1.18]), recurrent ACS (OR 0.55 [0.28-1.09]) and the incidence of CHF (OR 0.90 [0.38-2.12]) between patients treated with colchicine versus standard medical treatment. CONCLUSION:Adding colchicine to standard medical therapy in ACS patients significantly reduced hospitalizations but is associated with increased GI side effects. Further prospective trials are required to validate these findings and determine if early intervention with colchicine treatment improves clinical outcomes in ACS patients.

Introduction and importance:Stroke, a global health concern, often results from embolic events of cardiac origin. Coxsackie B virus (CBV) myocarditis, a common cause of viral heart infections, can lead to cardiac thrombi formation, subsequently causing devastating complications such as embolic stroke. The authors present a rare case of a 26-year-old male who experienced an embolic stroke following CBV myocarditis and cardiomyopathy. Case presentation:The patient exhibited left-sided weakness, facial droop, and respiratory distress. Laboratory findings indicated leukocytosis, hyponatremia, and elevated troponin I. Imaging revealed an acute right basal ganglia infarct and multifocal pulmonary embolism. The diagnosis involved positive CBV serology, severely reduced left ventricular function, and a large apical thrombus. Discussion:Cardioembolic strokes, often attributable to atrial fibrillation, can also result from intracardiac thrombosis associated with myocarditis. CBV, implicated in up to 40% of acute myocarditis cases, binds to cardiac myocytes, triggering inflammation and potential thrombus formation. Myocarditis-induced hypercoagulability increases the risk of thromboembolic events, complicating the clinical course. Conclusion:CBV myocarditis poses a risk of heart failure, cardiomyopathy, and thromboembolic complications such as embolic stroke. Vigilant monitoring for complications and prompt management is crucial, as primary disease treatment remains primarily supportive. This case highlights the need for increased awareness and further studies to understand the intricate relationship between viral myocarditis and embolic strokes.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in many therapies, of which many are repurposed and used for other diseases in the last decade such in Influenza and Ebola. We intend to provide a robust foundation for cardiovascular outcomes of the therapies to better understand the rationale for the clinical trials that were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to gain more clarity on the steps moving forward should the repurposing provide clinical benefit in pandemic situations. With this state-of-the-art review, we aim to improve the understanding of the cardiovascular involvement of the therapies prior to, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic to provide meaningful findings to the cardiovascular specialists and clinical trials for therapies, moving on from the period of pandemic urgency.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an idiopathic, autoimmune connective tissue disorder that primarily affects the synovial joints, causing symmetric, erosive-deforming polyarthritis. It is also associated with extra-articular manifestations, particularly cardiovascular (CV) diseases (CVD). CV risk modification in RA remains unsolved despite recent advances in the management of RA. RA is an independent risk factor for atherosclerosis. RA and atherosclerosis share similar pathophysiological features (such as the pro-inflammatory cascade activation including interleukin-6) and risk factors (such as microflora dysbacteriosis and smoking). Patients with RA experience an exacerbation of atherogenesis, with atheromas destabilization, endothelial dysfunction, vasculitis, and hypercytokinemia. Consequently, the inflammatory response associated with RA is the basis for CVD development. The treat-to-target strategy not only improved RA control but also had a favorable effect on the morpho-functional state of the CV system in patients living with RA. Thus, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) - in particular methotrexate - may have a beneficial effect on the prevention of CV events in RA. It must be mentioned that RA is a serious multi-system disease, not only because of a window period during which the course of RA can be reversed, but also due to early damage to the heart and blood vessels. For this reason, a thorough cardiological assessment must be performed for all patients with RA, regardless of sex, age, disease stage, and disease activity score.

Introduction:Renal cell carcinoma, a common kidney tumour which is often incidentally discovered on imaging, can manifest with atypical symptoms. Renal cell carcinoma with rhabdoid features is a rare occurrence and even rarer in case of adults. Renal cell carcinoma has the tendency to form thrombus that can migrate to renal vein, inferior vena cava and even right atrium.Case presentation:The authors report a case of an 81-year-old male with rhabdoid renal cell carcinoma presenting with persistent cough for 6-7 months. with tumour thrombus extending into the renal vein and hepatic inferior vena cava. The patient was found feeble for the surgery and hence was treated on anticancer drugs pembrolizumab and axitinib.Conclusion:Renal cell carcinoma has the tendency to form tumour thrombus in renal vein and inferior vena cava. Prognosis without surgical intervention in these conditions is very poor.

Introduction: Agenesis of the dorsal pancreas (ADP) is a clinically rare entity that occasionally presents with abdominal pain. It is also association with various disorders of glucose metabolism. Case presentation: A 23-year-old male presented with continuous epigastric pain for 4 h and intermittent vomiting. He has a history of experiencing recurrent abdominal pain and diarrhoea for the past 5 years. Additionally, he has been diagnosed with type 1 diabetes mellitus for 15 years. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography of the abdomen showed the absence of body and tail of the pancreas. Discussion: ADP is caused by unknown factors, but may be linked to genetic mutations or changes in signalling pathways related to retinoic acid and hedgehog. Symptoms can be absent, but may include abdominal pain, pancreatitis, and hyperglycaemia due to beta-cell dysfunction and insulin deficiency. Imaging modalities, such as contrast tomography or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, are crucial in the diagnosis of ADP. Conclusion: It is important to consider ADP as a differential diagnosis in patients with glucose metabolism disorders and associated symptoms such as abdominal pain, pancreatitis, or steatorrhea. It requires the combined use of imaging modalities such as ultrasound, contrast tomography, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, as ultrasound alone may not provide a complete diagnosis.

Background: Over 75% of menopausal women experience vasomotor symptoms (VMS), such as night sweats and hot flashes. Despite the prevalence of these symptoms, there is limited data on non-hormonal therapies to alleviate them. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, Ovid, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.Gov were searched for relevant studies. The search was performed using the following keywords, which were customized to suit the specific databases/registers: menopause, women, neurokinin 3, and/or Fezolinetant. The search was conducted until December 20, 2022. This systematic review was conducted in compliance with the PRISMA Statement 2020 guidelines. Results: A total of 326 records were found, with 10 studies (enrolling 1993 women) selected for inclusion. The women received 40-mg doses of NK1/3 receptor antagonists twice daily, with follow-ups at 1 to 3 weeks. Moderately strong evidence was found suggesting that NK1/3 receptor antagonists can help limit the frequency and severity of hot flashes in menopausal women. Conclusion: While the results should be interpreted with caution until further clinical trials validate the efficacy and safety of NK1/3 receptor antagonists among menopausal women, these findings suggest that they are promising targets for future pharmacological and clinical studies in addressing vasomotor symptoms.

Background: Zavegepant nasal spray is a novel CGRP receptor antagonist that has been developed for the acute treatment of migraine – a prevalent disease leading to disability and economic burden. The meta-analysis aims to quantify the efficacy of Zavegepant compared to standard care or placebo in achieving pain freedom, freedom from most bothersome symptoms (MBS), sustained pain freedom, and pain relapse at 2 to 48 hours. Methods: Databases and registers were systematically searched to identify relevant clinical trials. Two independent reviewers used a standardized data extraction form to collect relevant data on primary and secondary outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed in RevMan 5.4 software. The efficacy of Zavegepant was compared to placebo using odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 statistic, chi-square test, Z value, and P value. Cochrane ROB-2 and ROBINS-I tools were used to assess the biases (osf.io/b32ne). Results: Of 36 identified studies, 3 were included in this meta-analysis. Zavegepant was more effective in achieving pain freedom (OR: 1.6, P < .00001), and freedom from MBS at 2 hours (OR = 1.4, P < .00001). The intervention group demonstrated a higher likelihood of sustained pain freedom between 2 and 48 hours (OR = 1.74, P < .00001). Although there was a trend towards reduced pain relapse between 2 and 48 hours in the intervention group, the difference was insignificant (OR = 0.67, P = .11). Conclusion: This meta-analysis confirms the effectiveness of Zavegepant nasal spray in treating acute migraine, with significant improvements in pain and symptom relief. Further research is needed to determine the effect on pain relapse and overall safety.

This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of different non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs therapy (monotherapy or combined with antibiotics) against antibiotics monotherapy to understand the possible role of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in managing uncomplicated urinary tract infections and reduce overall antibiotic prescription. We searched four databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL. We included randomized controlled trials, which had included non-pregnant females above 18 years, published from 2010 to 2020 AD in the English language. We assessed risk of bias (ROB) using COCHRANE ROB version 2.0. We synthesized the conclusion from low ROB studies. Among five included studies, four studies compared non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs monotherapy against antibiotics monotherapy, and one study compared non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs + antibiotic therapy against antibiotic monotherapy. All studies with low ROB showed significantly higher events of symptom resolution by day 7 with antibiotic monotherapy compared to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs monotherapy. Overall, adverse events were not significantly different in two of three low risk of bias studies; however, one study reported significantly higher adverse effects with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Non-urinary tract infection–related adverse events were more common than urinary tract infections–related adverse events in both non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and antibiotic groups. Urinary tract infection–related adverse events were higher in the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs group compared to antibiotics. For every 20–60 participants treated, one would develop pyelonephritis additionally in non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs compared to antibiotics. Antibiotics were superior to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for treating uncomplicated lower urinary tract infections. However, further studies regarding the characteristics of patients likely to develop pyelonephritis on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs monotherapy, and the effectiveness and safety of a combination of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and antibiotics therapy are essential to reduce the burden of antibiotics and their associated problems.

Dear Editor, We read with a great interest the article by Gurjar and Agarwal,[1] which advocates continued preexposure prophylaxis of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in high-risk individuals and that timing of administration of HCQ remains crucial for its effectiveness in the management of COVID-19. HCQ works by suppressing the activity of the coronavirus in vitro.[2] HCQ prevents the attachment of the viral spike protein to the gangliosides. It also plays a role in interrupting viral replication by creating a basic pH in the endosomes.[3] In vitro efficacy has been demonstrated for HCQ for various viruses (HIV, dengue, and COVID-19) and it is considered to be the safer immunomodulator in patients with rheumatic diseases (RDs) and concomitant viral infection.[4] Both HCQ and chloroquine (CQ) are equally effective in terms of treatment, but HCQ is associated with fewer side effects and can be used in pregnancy.[5] Despite a promising mechanism of action and acceptable safety profile, unfortunately, evidence of efficacy from most of the clinical trials using HCQ as a treatment for COVID-19 is unconvincing and inconsistent.[6] The only successful trials have been retracted, while other similar ones have demonstrated varying results.[78] One randomized clinical trial in 62 patients in China whose findings were supposed to hasten clinical recovery has been criticized for not being peer-reviewed.[9] In an observational study done in over 1400 hospitalized COVID-19 patients in New York, it was found that HCQ was not effective in decreasing the incidence of intubation or mortality when compared with COVID-19 patients who receive a placebo.[10] The UK RECOVERY trial also concluded that HCQ was ineffective in reducing mortality and was associated with risks in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.[11] To date, no precise data on the efficacy and safety of HCQ or CQ in the management of COVID-19 patients have been available.[11] Rheumatologists are well acquiesced and comfortable with the use of HCQ with a large experience base in RDs. The cost, ease of administration, and immunomodulatory action make it a particularly attractive option for treatment. However, the main dictum in medicine is "primum non nocere." Whether the large experience base of rheumatologists with respect to the safety of HCQ in RDs will translate into similar experience in COVID-19 remains to be proven, particularly so amid concerns of sudden cardiac death in patients with severe COVID-19. Thus, more clinical trials and registry-based data are required in well-stratified subsets of the population with various comorbidities before we can comment on the efficacy and safety of HCQ in the prevention and treatment of coronavirus. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.

Background: Health disparities have become apparent since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. When observing racial discrimination in healthcare, self-reported incidences, and perceptions among minority groups in the United States suggest that, the most socioeconomically underrepresented groups will suffer disproportionately in COVID-19 due to synergistic mechanisms. This study reports racially-stratified data regarding the experiences and impacts of different groups availing the healthcare system to identify disparities in outcomes of minority and majority groups in the United States. Methods: Studies were identified utilizing PubMed, Embase, CINAHL Plus, and PsycINFO search engines without date and language restrictions. The following keywords were used: Healthcare, raci*, ethnic*, discriminant, hosti*, harass*, insur*, education, income, psychiat*, COVID-19, incidence, mortality, mechanical ventilation. Statistical analysis was conducted in Review Manager (RevMan V.5.4). Unadjusted Odds Ratios, P-values, and 95% confidence intervals were presented. Results: Discrimination in the United States is evident among racial groups regarding medical care portraying mental risk behaviors as having serious outcomes in the health of minority groups. The perceived health inequity had a low association to the majority group as compared to the minority group (OR = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.78; P = .007), and the association of mental health problems to the Caucasian-American majority group was low (OR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.45 to 0.58; P < .001). Conclusion: As the pandemic continues into its next stage, efforts should be taken to address the gaps in clinical training and education, and medical practice to avoid the recurring patterns of racial health disparities that become especially prominent in community health emergencies. A standardized tool to assess racial discrimination and inequity will potentially improve pandemic healthcare delivery.

Background: Current literature lacks characterization of the post-recovery sequelae among COVID-19 patients. This review characterizes the course of clinical, laboratory, radiological findings during the primary infection period, and the complications post-recovery. Primary care findings are presented for long-COVID care. Methods: Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, 4 databases were searched (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL Plus, Scopus) through December 5, 2020, using the keywords “COVID-19 and/or recovered and/or cardiovascular and/or long-term and/or sequelae and/or sub-acute and/or complication.” We included published peer-reviewed case reports, case series, and cross-sectional studies providing the clinical course of COVID-19 infection, and cardiopulmonary complications of patients who recovered from COVID-19, while making healthcare considerations for primary care workers. Results: We identified 29 studies across 9 countries including 37.9% Chinese and 24.1% U.S. studies, comprising 655 patients (Mean Age = 45) with various ethnical backgrounds including Asian and European. Based on the WHO COVID-19 severity classification scale, initial disease severity was mild for 377 patients and severe for 52 patients. Treatments during primary infection included corticosteroids, oxygen support, and antivirals. The mean value (in days) for complication onset after acute recovery was 28 days. Complete blood counts and RT-PCR tests were the most common laboratory results described. In 22 of the studies, patients showed signs of clinical improvement and were prescribed medications such as anticoagulants or corticosteroids. Conclusion: Post-recovery infectious complications are common in long-COVID-19 patients ranging from mild infections to life-threatening conditions. International thoracic and cardiovascular societies need to develop guidelines for patients recovering from COVID-19 pneumonia, while focused patient care by the primary care physician is crucial to curb preventable adverse events. Recommendations for real-time and lab-quality diagnostic tests are warranted to establish point-of-care testing, detect early complications, and provide timely treatment.

N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is an abundantly available antioxidant with a wide range of antidotal properties currently best studied for its use in treating acetaminophen overdose. It has a robustly established safety profile with easily tolerated side effects and presents the Food and Drug Administration's approval for use in treating acetaminophen overdose patients. It has been proven efficacious in off-label uses, such as in respiratory diseases, heart disease, cancer, human immunodeficiency virus infection, and seasonal influenza. Clinical trials have recently shown that NAC's capacity to replenish glutathione stores may significantly improve coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes, especially in high risk individuals. Interestingly, individuals with glucose 6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency have been shown to experience even greater benefit. The same study has concluded that NAC's ability to mitigate the impact of the cytokine storm and prevent elevation of liver enzymes, C-reactive protein, and ferritin is associated with higher success rates weaning from the ventilator and return to normal function in COVID-19 patients. Considering the background knowledge of biochemistry, current uses of NAC in clinical practice, and newly acquired evidence on its potential efficacy against COVID-19, it is worthwhile to investigate further whether this agent can be used as a treatment or adjuvant for COVID-19.

As of 3 February 2021, 5 741 533 confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had been recorded across the 22 countries of World Health Organization’s (WHO) Eastern Mediterranean Region since the first case was reported in the Region on 29 January 2020. Although the number of COVID-19 cases reported differs considerably between different WHO regions, the burden of COVID-19 on health care systems remains critical (1). The need to prioritize resources to protect against economic, health and social crises, and the reduction in in-person assistance and access to health services, could lead to a reduction in health services for family planning programmes. One of the most important features of family planning is the use of birth control methods which allows families to plan the desired number of children and birth spacing for women of reproductive age. We explore the family planning practices prevalent in the Eastern Mediterranean Region in the 21st century and access to these services during the COVID-19 pandemic.