4.7 Article

Unilateral Pleural Effusion after Third Dose of BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccination: Case Report

Journal

JOURNAL OF PERSONALIZED MEDICINE
Volume 13, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jpm13030391

Keywords

Pfizer vaccine; COVID-19 vaccine; BNT162b2; mRNA vaccination; pleural effusion

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Vaccination is the most effective strategy in preventing COVID-19. Clinical trials have shown the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines. However, there has been an increase in rare adverse effects in vaccinated individuals in real-life settings.
Vaccination remains the best strategy against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in terms of prevention. The efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines is supported by well-designed clinical trials that recruited many participants. It is well-known that vaccination is associated with local side effects related to the injection site, and mild, systemic side effects. However, there has been an increase in the occurrence of what is known as infrequent adverse effects in the population of vaccinated individuals in real life. We present the case of a 46-year-old woman with no past medical history, who presented with a sharp chest pain with deep inspiration, a few days after receiving the third dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2). There is an association between the BNT16b2 vaccination and myocarditis, pericarditis, and even bilateral pleural effusions. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report featuring a unilateral pleural effusion in a patient with no known past medical history, who did not develop cardiac involvement nor have any viral infection. The aim of our report is to inform health professionals of the possibility of encountering this rare adverse event in their daily practice, as the population of individuals who are receiving additional vaccine doses is increasing steadily.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available