Warfarin is a frequently prescribed anticoagulant in rehabilitation patients. Adverse drug reactions of warfarin were reported as bleeding and cutaneous microvascular thrombosis. Major bleeding, such as intracranial hemorrhage and psoas hematoma, in patients receiving anticoagulation therapy is a rare condition, but sometimes very serious complication that can even be fatal. Patient-specific factors (eg, age, body size, race, concurrent diseases, and medications) explain some of the individual variability in warfarin dose, but genetic factors, which influence warfarin response, explain a significantly higher proportion of the variability in the dose. There are two identified genes that are responsible for the main proportion of the genetic effect: CYP2C9, which codes for the enzyme cytochrome P450 2C9 that metabolizes S-warfarin, and VKORC1, which codes for warfarin's target, vitamin K epoxide reductase. We report a case of intolerance to warfarin dosing, due to impaired drug metabolism in a patient with CYP2C9*1/*3 and VKORC 1173TT. Fortunately, there are no severe complications.
Body Size ; Continental Population Groups ; Cytochrome P-450 Enzyme System ; Drug Toxicity ; Hematoma ; Hemorrhage ; Humans ; Intracranial Hemorrhages ; Mixed Function Oxygenases ; Oxidoreductases ; Thrombosis ; Vitamin K ; Warfarin

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the etiology of non-traumatic plexopathy and clarify the clinical, electrophysiological characteristics according to its etiology. METHOD: We performed a retrospective analysis of 63 non-traumatic plexopathy patients that had been diagnosed by nerve conduction studies (NCS) and needle electromyography (EMG). Clinical, electrophysiological, imaging findings were obtained from medical records. RESULTS: We identified 36 cases with brachial plexopathy (BP) and 27 cases with lumbosacral plexopathy (LSP). The causes of plexopathy were neoplastic (36.1%), thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS) (25.0%), radiation induced (16.7%), neuralgic amyotrophy (8.3%), perioperative (5.6%), unknown (8.3%) in BP, while neoplastic (59.3%), radiation induced (22.2%), neuralgic amyotrophy (7.4%), psoas muscle abscess (3.7%), and unknown (7.4%) in LSP. In neoplastic plexopathy, pain presented as the first symptom in most patients (82.8%), with the lower trunk of the brachial plexus predominantly involved. In radiation induced plexopathy (RIP), pain was a common initial symptom, but the proportion was smaller (50%), and predominant involvements of bilateral lumbosacral plexus and whole trunk of brachial or lumbosacral plexus were characteristic. Myokymic discharges were noted in 41.7% patients with RIP. Abnormal NCS finding in the medial antebrachial cutaneous nerve was the most sensitive to diagnose TOS. Neuralgic amyotrophy of the brachial plexus showed upper trunk involvement in all cases. CONCLUSION: By integrating anatomic, pathophysiologic knowledge with detailed clinical assessment and the results of ancillary studies, physicians can make an accurate diagnosis and prognosis.
Abscess ; Adult ; Brachial Plexus ; Brachial Plexus Neuritis ; Brachial Plexus Neuropathies ; Electromyography ; Electrophysiology ; Humans ; Lumbosacral Plexus ; Needles ; Neural Conduction ; Prognosis ; Psoas Muscles ; Retrospective Studies ; Thoracic Outlet Syndrome

BACKGROUND: The regional lymph nodal status is the most powerful independent predictor of survival for patients with clinical N0 primary cutaneous malignant melanoma. OBJECTIVE: We wanted to evaluate the feasibility and morbidity of the sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) staging using a multidisciplinary team approach, in cooperation with other surgical departments, at a university hospital setting. METHODS: Twenty two patients with cutaneous melanoma and who were treated at Kyungpook National University Hospital were included in this study. They all received SLNB, which was done by the Departments of Dermatology and General Surgery. We evaluated the feasibility and side effects of SLNB. RESULTS: Pathologically-positive sentinel nodes were found in 7 of the 22 cases (31.8%) and all 7 patients were consequently upstaged. The whole process involved in SLNB was well tolerated by nearly all the patients, with only mild and transient complications being observed. CONCLUSION: We suggest that in a Korean setting, utilizing SLNB with a multi-disciplinary team approach is a technically feasible procedure that is able to detect occult nodal metastasis with low morbidity rates in patients with cutaneous malignant melanoma.
Dermatology ; Humans ; Melanoma ; Neoplasm Metastasis ; Nitriles ; Pyrethrins ; Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy