ABSTRACT
Nowadays, the most notable negative effects of SARS-CoV-2 are the pulmonary manifestations as well as cardiovascular system damage. Evaluation of postvaccination changes in the male reproductive system and analysis of their mechanisms seem to be important because of their direct effect on fertility. Thus, it may play a significant role in perspective. Studies based on the application of fluorescence in situ hybridization showed that most acini epithelial cells, as well as some mesenchymal and endothelial cells were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. As for co-expression of the ACE2 cell receptor and the serine protease TMPRSS2, which the virus uses to enter cells, it was also detected in most prostate epithelial and stromal cells. The mechanism of prostate damage in COVID-19 may also be related to dysregulation of the renin-angiotensin system. Increased levels of angiotensin-2 secretion in the prostate in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia may increase the effect of the virus directly on the cells of the organ. These mechanisms may explain the elevated serum prostatic specific antigen levels in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia during the active period of COVID-19. Non-specific mechanism of prostate damage is connected with coagulopathy development – thrombosis of venous plexus and hemodynamic disturbances, which can cause secondary damage of parenchyma. There is a definite relationship between the hormonal status of the patient and the severity of the infection – low levels of both testosterone and dihydrotestosterone contribute to the development of severe complications in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. The possibility of using testosterone drugs in patients with hypogonadism and COVID-19 as an alternative treatment option – to suppress the cytokine storm phenomenon – is being considered. Patients with a history of prostate cancer, with localized prostate cancer in the absence of metastases participated in vaccine studies – among the side effects of vaccination in several cases only regional lymphadenopathy on the injection side of the drug was noted. © 2022 ABV-Press Publishing House. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Background/objective Although a third dose of the coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine was initiated, the reports of the post-vaccination adverse reactions after dose three from Japan were limited. We aimed to report on post-vaccination adverse reactions to the third dose of the vaccine among healthcare workers and compare the results with those after the first two doses of vaccine at a tertiary medical center in Japan. Materials and methods After each vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) administration, healthcare workers answered a Web-based questionnaire for two consecutive days regarding local and systemic adverse reactions and anaphylaxis reactions. Information about those who took antipyretics and analgesics was also collected. Data were collected using Microsoft Forms (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA), a web-based questionnaire software. We compared the proportions of post-vaccination adverse reactions among the three doses of vaccine using the chi-squared test. Results A total of 1,990 employees received the first dose in March 2021, 1,988 employees received the second dose in April 2021, and 1,748 employees received the third dose between December 2021 and January 2022. The median age was 32 years and 21% were men. Local and systemic adverse reactions were greater after dose three than those with the primary series, except for nausea and vomiting. Injected site pain, fatigue, and headache were the three most commonly reported adverse reactions throughout the three sessions. A total of four employees developed anaphylaxis reactions. Additionally, 944 and 1,016 employees reported taking antipyretics and analgesics after doses two and three. Conclusions The coronavirus 2019 booster vaccine was safe and well-tolerated. Clinicians should encourage the public to receive the coronavirus 2019 vaccine series.
ABSTRACT
The term "COVID arm" has been coined to describe a harmless delayed hypersensitivity reaction occurring approximately a week after administration of the novel SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine. It appears as a red, warm, pruritic, indurated, or swollen area in the vicinity of the vaccine site. These reactions, especially if accompanied by systemic symptoms, have been mistaken for cellulitis. We report 3 cases of COVID arm, 2 of which were mistaken for cellulitis. Distinguishing features of COVID arm from cellulitis include pruritus as a common finding, occurrence approximately a week after vaccination, a lack of progression of symptoms, rapid response to topical steroids, and/or spontaneous resolution usually over 4 to 5 days.Practice Points:⢠Patients receiving SARS-CoV-2 vaccines may experience delayed hypersensitivity reactions characterized by erythema, swelling, and itching occurring near the vaccination site (COVID arm), approximately a week after vaccination.⢠Clinicians can distinguish SARS-CoV-2 vaccine reactions from cellulitis by the time of onset (approximately a week vs 5 days), by the lack of progression of symptoms, and resolution over 4 to 5 days.⢠Severe cases of COVID arm may be treated with topical steroids.