Objective: Early diagnosis of sepsis is essential for bundle treatment. The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical significance of presepsin in sepsis related organ failure in the emergency department compared to other inflammatory markers. Methods: This was a retrospective review. Enrolled patients were divided into three groups, namely non-infectious organ failure, sepsis, and septic shock groups. The efficacy of presepsin, procalcitonin, and C-reactive protein (CRP) in discriminating sepsis were compared among the three patient groups. The presepsin, procalcitonin, and CRP levels were compared between 28-day survivors and non-survivors among those with sepsis. Results: A total of 277 patients with organ failure were included. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCs) of presepsin, procalcitonin, and CRP for differentiating sepsis from non-infectious organ failure were 0.622, 0.777, and 0.809, respectively. The areas under the curve (AUCs) of presepsin, procalcitonin, and CRP for differentiating sepsis from septic shock were 0.717, 0.667, and 0.609, respectively. The AUCs of presepsin, procalcitonin, and CRP for predicting sepsis related mortality were 0.743, 0.635, and 0.632, respectively. Sepsis patients with high presepsin levels had a higher mortality than those with lower presepsin levels. Conclusion Presepsin is a good marker to differentiate septic shock from sepsis and predict mortality. CRP can aid the differential diagnosis of non-infectious causes in patients with organ failure.

Objective: The Functioning Assessment Short Test (FAST) is a relatively specific test for bipolar disorders designed to assess the main functioning problems experienced by patients. This brief instrument includes 24 items assessing impairment or disability in 6 domains of functioning: autonomy, occupational functioning, cognitive functioning, financial issues, interpersonal relationships, and leisure time. It has already been translated into standardized versions in several languages. The aim of this study is to measure the validity and reliability of the Korean version of FAST (K-FAST). Methods: A total of 209 bipolar disorder patients were recruited from 14 centers in Korea. K-FAST, Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), Bipolar Depression Rating Scale (BDRS), Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) and the World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment Instrument Brief Form (WHOQOL-BREF) were administered, and psychometric analysis of the K-FAST was conducted. Results: The internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) of the K-FAST was 0.95. Test-retest reliability analysis showed a strong correlation between the two measures assessed at a 1-week interval (ICC = 0.97; p ＜ 0.001). The K-FAST exhibited significant correlations with GAF (r = −0.771), WHOQOL-BREF (r = −0.326), YMRS (r = 0.509) and BDRS (r = 0.598). A strong negative correlation with GAF pointed to a reasonable degree of concurrent validity. Although the exploratory factor analysis showed four factors, the confirmatory factor analysis of questionnaires had a good fit for a six factors model (CFI = 0.925; TLI = 0.912; RMSEA = 0.078). Conclusion The K-FAST has good psychometric properties, good internal consistency, and can be applicable and acceptable to the Korean context.

The objective of this study was to compare recommendations of the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Bipolar Disorder 2022 (KMAP-BP 2022) with other recently published guidelines for treating bipolar disorder. We reviewed a total of six recently published global treatment guidelines and compared treatment recommendation of the KMAP-BP 2022 with those of other guidelines. For initial treatment of mania, there were no significant differences across treatment guidelines. All guidelines recommended mood stabilizer (MS) or atypical antipsychotic (AAP) monotherapy or a combination of an MS with an AAP as a first-line treatment strategy in a same degree for mania. However, the KMAP-BP 2022 recommended MS + AAP combination therapy for psychotic mania, mixed mania and psychotic depression as treatment of choice. Aripiprazole, quetiapine and olanzapine were the first-line AAPs for nearly all phases of bipolar disorder across guidelines. Some guideline suggested olanzapine is a second-line options during maintenance treatment, related to concern about long-term tolerability. Most guidelines advocated newer AAPs (asenapine, cariprazine, long-acting injectable risperidone, and aripiprazole once monthly) as first-line treatment options for all phases while lamotrigine was recommended for depressive and maintenance phases. Lithium and valproic acid were commonly used as MSs in all phases of bipolar disorder. KMAP-BP 2022 guidelines were similar to other guidelines, reflecting current changes in prescription patterns for bipolar disorder based on accumulated research data. Strong preference for combination therapy was characteristic of KMAP-BP 2022, predominantly in the treatment of psychotic mania, mixed mania and psychotic depression.

Spontaneous intracranial hypotension (SIH) is a condition caused by spontaneous cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage, resulting in orthostatic headache as the main symptom, but other symptoms such as memory loss, nausea, and tinnitus may also be present. Various imaging techniques are used to diagnose SIH, with magnetic resonance imaging myelography being an important tool for detecting the leakage site of CSF. Conservative treatments including hydration, bed rest, and intravenous caffeine have been tried with limited success. Epidural blood patch (EBP) is the most commonly performed treatment for SIH after the failure of conservative management. There are different opinions about the EBP procedure (e.g., blind EBP vs. targeted EBP). This report describes the treatment of SIH with targeted EBP according to imaging diagnosis after the failure of initial blind lumbar EBP.

PURPOSE: This prospective clinical study was conducted to evaluate the clinical usefulness of the freely detachable zirconia ball- and spring-retained implant prosthesis (BSRP) through a comparative analysis of screw- and cement-retained implant prosthesis (SCRP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multi-center, randomized, prospective clinical study evaluating the clinical usefulness of the detachable zirconia ball- and spring-retained implant prostheses was conducted. Sixty-four implant prostheses in 64 patients were examined. Periodic observational studies were conducted at 0, 3, 6, and 12 months after delivery of the implant prosthesis. Factors such as implant success rate, marginal bone resorption, periodontal pocket depth, plaque and bleeding index, and prosthetic complications were evaluated, respectively. RESULTS: During the 1-year observation period, all implants survived without functional problems and clinical mobility, showing a 100% implant success rate. Marginal bone resorption was significantly higher in the SCRP group than in the BSRP group only at the time of implant prosthesis delivery (P = .043). In all observation periods, periodontal pocket depth was slightly higher in the BSRP group than in the SCRP group, but there was no significant difference (P > .05). The modified plaque index (mPI) scores of both groups were moderate. Higher ratio of a score 2 in modified sulcus bleeding index (mBI) was observed in the BSRP group in the 6- and 12-months observation. CONCLUSION Within the limitations of this study, the newly developed zirconia ball- and spring-retained implant prosthesis could be considered as an applicable and predictable treatment method along with the existing screw- and cement-retained prosthesis.

Objective: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is prevalent in adults, and psychiatric comorbidities are common in adults with ADHD. We aimed to examine the prevalence of adult ADHD with several common psychiatric conditions in a community sample in Korea and the association between adult ADHD and risk of psychiatric comorbidities. Methods: This study used a cross-sectional survey design. We provided supplementary and optional self-report questionnaires, including the Korean version of the World Health Organization Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS) short screening scale, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 for screening for depression, Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test alcohol consumption questions, and the Korean version of the Mood Disorders Questionnaire, to Korean adults who visited one of six centers of a large private healthcare company for the National General Health Examination. Results: A total of 17,799 subjects included in this study, and 430 (2.4%) were positive on the ASRS screen. ADHD was significantly associated with the 19−30-year-old age group (odds ratio [OR] = 3.938), lower income (OR = 1.298), depression (OR = 11.563), and bipolar disorder (OR = 3.162). Conclusion Adult ADHD was highly associated with depression and bipolar disorder, suggesting that clinicians should carefully evaluate and treat such psychiatric disorders in adults with ADHD symptoms.

Objectives: Treatment guidelines or an algorithm can help clinicians implement better practices and clinical decisions. Therefore, the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Bipolar Disorder 2022 (KMAP-BP 2022) was revised again through a consensus of expert opinion. The diagnosis and treatment of mixed features are not simple, and there are many things to discuss. We describe the preferences and recommendations from KMAP-BP 2022 for the treatment of mood episodes with mixed features. Methods: We revised the KMAP-BP 2018 questionnaire and conducted the survey with expert clinicians. Out of ninety-three members of the review committee, eighty-seven completed the survey. We analyzed the answers, discussed the data, and held a clinician hearing. Results: In first-step strategies for mixed features with more manic symptoms, a combination of a mood stabilizer and an atypical antipsychotic is the treatment of choice. Mood stabilizer monotherapy and atypical antipsychotic monotherapy are preferred strategies. For mixed features with more depressive symptoms, a combination of mood stabilizer and atypical antipsychotic, a combination of atypical antipsychotic and lamotrigine (LMT), atypical antipsychotic monotherapy, a combination of mood stabilizer and LMT, and mood stabilizer monotherapy are preferred. For mixed features with similar manic symptoms and depressive symptoms, a combination of mood stabilizer and atypical antipsychotic, atypical antipsychotic monotherapy, and mood stabilizer monotherapy are preferred. Conclusion For mixed features, a combination of mood stabilizer and atypical antipsychotic is generally preferred, and LMT is preferred for depressive symptoms. Compared with KMAP-BP 2018, more diverse strategies and drugs are being attempted for the treatment of mixed features.

Objectives: After the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Bipolar Disorder (KMAP-BP) was developed in 2002, its fifth revision was completed in 2022 to reflect the recent rapid developments and research into bipolar disorder and its psychopharmacology. Methods: According to the methodology for previous versions, the depressive episode section of KMAP-BP 2022 was revised based on a survey consisting of 11 questions. Among ninetythree experts, eighty-seven members of the review committee (93.5%) completed the survey.The executive committee analyzed the results and discussed the final production of an algorithm by considering the scientific evidence. Results: Overall, the results from this study showed little change in comparison with previous versions of KMAP-BP. However, there have been significant changes in recommendations over the span of about 20 years. The preferences for lamotrigine and atypical antipsychotics, especially aripiprazole, quetiapine, and olanzapine, have shown a tendency to continuously increase, but the preferences for risperidone and ziprasidone have not increased, but have decreased. Moreover, the preference for typical antipsychotics has significantly decreased. Additionally, concerns over the use of antidepressants in bipolar depression have been raised, and their use is not recommended in KMAP-BP 2022 as a first-line treatment. Conclusion Pharmacotherapy for acute depressive episodes with various clinical progressions and various subtypes still shows diversity, compared to pharmacotherapy for mania. We look forward to the development of bipolar depressive, episode-specific therapeutic drugs in the future, and hope the fifth update of KMAP-BP will be a complementary option for clinicians and their patients with bipolar disorder.

Objectives: The Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Bipolar Disorder (KMAP-BP) is a consensus-based medication guideline. To reflect advances in pharmacotherapy for bipolar disorders, we updated KMAP-BP to provide more timely information for clinicians. Methods: We conducted a survey using a questionnaire on treatments formanic/hypomanic episodes. Eighty-seven members among ninety-three members of the review committee (93.5%) completed the survey. Each treatment strategy or treatment option for manic/hypomanic episodes was evaluated with an overall score of 9, and the resulting 95% confidence interval treatment options were categorized into three recommendation levels (primary, secondary, and tertiary). The executive committee analyzed the results and discussed the final production of an algorithm by considering the scientific evidence. Results: The combination of a mood stabilizer and an atypical antipsychotic, monotherapy with a mood stabilizer, or monotherapy with an atypical antipsychotic were recommended as the firstline pharmacotherapeutic strategy for the initial treatment of mania without psychotic features. The mood stabilizer and atypical antipsychotic combination was the treatment of choice, and atypical antipsychotic monotherapy was the first-line treatment for mania with psychotic features. When initial treatment fails, a combination of mood stabilizer+atypical antipsychotic and switching to another first-line agent is recommended. For hypomania, monotherapy with either mood stabilizer or atypical antipsychotic is the recommended first-line treatment, but the mood stabilizer+atypical antipsychotic combination is recommended as well. Conclusion It is notable that there were changes in the preferences for the use of individual atypical antipsychotics, and the preference for the use of mood stabilizer increased for treatment-resistant mania.

Objectives: The pharmacotherapy of bipolar disorder is complex. A treatment guideline or algorithm can help clinicians implement better practices and clinical decisions. Therefore, the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Bipolar Disorder (KMAP-BP) was revised through expert consensus on pharmacotherapy for bipolar disorder. Methods: We revised the KMAP-BP 2018 questionnaire and conducted a survey of expert clinicians. Out of ninety-three members of the review committee, eighty-seven completed the survey. We analyzed the answers, discussed the data, and held a clinician hearing. Here, we report the results from KMAP-BP 2022. Results: The preferred first-step strategies for acute euphoric mania are a combination of a mood stabilizer (MS) and an atypical antipsychotic (AAP), MS monotherapy, and AAP monotherapy. For psychotic mania, an MS and AAP combination, and AAP monotherapy are preferred. For hypomania, MS monotherapy and AAP monotherapy are preferred. The first-step strategies for mild to moderate bipolar depression are MS monotherapy, lamotrigine (LMT) monotherapy, AAP monotherapy, an MS+AAP combination, and an AAP+LMT combination. For non-psychotic severe depression, the MS+AAP combination, the AAP+LMT combination, and the MS+LMT combination are preferred. For psychotic severe depression, MS+AAP and AAP+LMT are preferred. Conclusion We obtained expert consensus and developed KMAP-BP 2022. Compared with KMAP-BP 2018, we can figure out clinicians’ preferences and decisions in real clinical situations more clearly. The preference for AAP increased, and that of MS and an antidepressant decreased. We hope KMAP-BP 2022 is helpful for clinicians who treat patients with bipolar disorder.