COVID-19 vaccination and the risk of cardiovascular and thromboembolic events after SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Heymans, S.; Heidecker, B.; Marjenberg, Z.; Green, R.; Pliakas, T.; Lip, G. Y. H.; Lüscher, T. F.; Abduljawad, S.
Show abstract
Background and Aims SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and venous thromboembolism events. We aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 vaccination prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection on the risk of these events post-infection. Methods Embase and MEDLINE were searched from January 2021 to 11 September 2025, supplemented by citation searching. Observational studies were included if they reported risks of cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, or venous thromboembolic events after SARS-CoV-2 infection between different vaccination groups (e.g. unvaccinated, vaccinated, or booster vaccinated), or reported risk of events after SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with no infection, stratified by vaccination status. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to estimate pooled hazard ratios (HRs) comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals across prespecified outcomes. Results Twenty-three studies were included in the systematic review; most reported an association between vaccination and a reduced risk of post-infection vascular events. Ten studies were included across meta-analyses comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Pre-infection vaccination was associated with significantly reduced risks of composite cardiovascular/cerebrovascular events (HR 0.60, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.51-0.69), stroke (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.64-0.88), acute coronary syndrome (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.95), arrhythmias (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.69-0.98), and venous thromboembolism (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.36-0.73). No statistically significant reduction was observed for heart failure (HR 0.72 [95% CI 0.47-1.10]). Conclusions Pre-infection COVID-19 vaccination is associated with lower risks of cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and venous thromboembolism events following SARS-CoV-2 infection in the pre- and post-Omicron eras, supporting its role within broader prevention strategies
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Myocarditis and Pericarditis following COVID-19 Vaccination: Rapid Systematic Review of Incidence, Risk Factors, and Clinical Course 95%
- Characterizing the incidence of adverse events of special interest for COVID-19 vaccines across eight countries: a multinational network cohort study 92%
- Heparin for Moderately Ill Patients with Covid-19 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Post-marketing active surveillance of myocarditis and pericarditis following vaccination with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in persons aged 12-39 years in Italy: a multi-database, self-controlled case series study 94%
- Association of COVID-19 vaccines ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 with major venous, arterial, or thrombocytopenic events: whole population cohort study in 46 million adults in England 94%
- Differential impact of Covid-19 on incidence of diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular diseases in acute, post-acute and long Covid-19: population-based cohort study in the United Kingdom 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Leveraging genetic data to elucidate the relationship between Covid-19 and ischemic stroke 93%
- Influence of socioeconomic status on functional outcomes after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis 92%
- Tenecteplase 0.4 mg/kg in moderate and severe acute ischemic stroke: A pooled analysis of NOR-TEST & NOR-TEST 2A 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparative Effectiveness of the Bivalent (Original/Omicron BA.4/BA.5) mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines mRNA-1273.222 and BNT162b2 Bivalent in Adults With Underlying Medical Conditions in the United States 92%
- Effectiveness of the WHO-authorized Covid-19 Vaccines: a Rapid Review of Global Reports till June 30, 2021 91%
- Thrombotic adverse events reported for Moderna, Pfizer and Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines: comparison of occurrence and clinical outcomes in the EudraVigilance database 91%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.