Background and Objectives: Although anticoagulation with warfarin is recommended as an international normalized ratio (INR) of prothrombin time between 2.0 and 3.0 and mean time in the therapeutic range (TTR) ≥70%, little has been proven that universal criteria might be suitable in Korean atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Methods: We analyzed 710 patients with non-valvular AF who took warfarin. INR value and clinical outcomes were assessed during 2-year follow-up. Intensity of anticoagulation was assessed as mean INR value and TTR according to target INR range. Primary net-clinical outcome was defined as the composite of new-onset stroke and major bleeding. Secondary netclinical outcome was defined as the composite of new-onset stroke, major bleeding and death. Results: Thromboembolism was significantly decreased when mean INR was over 1.6. Major bleeding was significantly decreased when TTR was over 70% and mean INR was less than 2.6. Mean INR 1.6-2.6 significantly reduced thromboembolism (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19-0.85), major bleeding (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.23-0.81), primary (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.29-0.84) and secondary (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28-0.74) net-clinical outcomes, whereas mean INR 2.0-3.0 did not. Simultaneous satisfaction of mean INR 1.6-2.6 and TTR ≥70% was associated with significant risk reduction of major bleeding, primary and secondary net-clinical outcomes. Conclusions: Mean INR 1.6-2.6 was better than mean INR 2.0-3.0 for the prevention of thromboembolism and major bleeding. However, INR 1.6-2.6 and TTR ≥70% had similar clinical outcomes to INR 2.0-3.0 and TTR ≥70% in Korean patients with non-valvular AF.

Aims A comprehensive nationwide study on the incidence and outcomes of COVID-19 vaccination-related myocarditis (VRM) is in need. Methods and results Among 44 276 704 individuals with at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccination, the incidence and clinical courses of VRM cases confirmed by the Expert Adjudication Committee of the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency were analyzed. COVID-19 VRM was confirmed in 480 cases (1.08 cases per 100 000 persons). Vaccination-related myocarditis incidence was significantly higher in men than in women (1.35 vs. 0.82 per 100 000 persons, P < 0.001) and in mRNA vaccines than in other vaccines (1.46 vs. 0.14 per 100 000 persons, P < 0.001). Vaccination-related myocarditis incidence was highest in males between the ages of 12 and 17 years (5.29 cases per 100 000 persons) and lowest in females over 70 years (0.16 cases per 100 000 persons). Severe VRM was identified in 95 cases (19.8% of total VRM, 0.22 per 100 000 vaccinated persons), 85 intensive care unit admission (17.7%), 36 fulminant myocarditis (7.5%), 21 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy (4.4%), 21 deaths (4.4%), and 1 heart transplantation (0.2%). Eight out of 21 deaths were sudden cardiac death (SCD) attributable to VRM proved by an autopsy, and all cases of SCD attributable to VRM were aged under 45 years and received mRNA vaccines. Conclusion Although COVID-19 VRM was rare and showed relatively favorable clinical courses, severe VRM was found in 19.8% of all VRM cases. Moreover, SCD should be closely monitored as a potentially fatal complication of COVID-19 vaccination.

Post-vaccination myocarditis after administration of the NVX-CoV2373 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine has been reported in a limited population. We report the first biopsy-proven case of myopericarditis after administration of second dose of NVX-CoV2373 COVID-19 vaccine (Novavax®) in Korea. A 30-year-old man was referred to emergency department with complaints of chest pain and mild febrile sense for two days. He received the second dose vaccine 17 days ago. Acute myopericarditis by the vaccination was diagnosed by cardiac endomyocardial biopsy. He was treated with corticosteroid 1 mg/kg/day for 5 days and tapered for one week. He successfully recovered and was discharged on the 12th day of hospitalization. The present case suggests acute myopericarditis as a vaccination complication by Novavax® in Korea.

Author's summary According to current guidelines, an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is the first-line therapy for Brugada syndrome. But, fundamentally, ICD is not a therapeutic modality. We have quinidine. However, it has several adverse effects. The present study shows that artemisinin suppresses the development of ventricular tachyarrhythmia by inhibition of I to channels. The safety of artemisinin was verified in malarial treatment. Therefore, it is meaningful as a drug re-position and there might be a possibility to use for Brugada syndrome in real-world practice if the efficacy is verified in following clinical studies.