Background: Maintenance of stable blood pressure (BP) during cerebrovascular bypass surgery is crucial to prevent cerebral ischemia. We compared the effect of remimazolam anesthesia with that of propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia on intraoperative hemodynamic stability and the need for vasoactive agents in patients undergoing cerebrovascular bypass surgery. Methods: Sixty-five patients were randomized into remimazolam (n = 31, remimazolam-based intravenous anesthesia) and control groups (n = 34, propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia). The primary outcome was the occurrence of intraoperative hypotension. The secondary outcomes included hypotension duration, lowest mean BP (MBP), generalized average real variability (ARV) of MBP, and consumption of phenylephrine, norepinephrine, or remifentanil. Results: Occurrence rate and duration of hypotension were significantly lower in the remimazolam group (38.7% vs. 73.5%, P = 0.005; 0 [0, 10] vs. 7.5 [1.25, 25] min, P = 0.008). Remimazolam also showed better outcomes for lowest MBP (78 [73, 84] vs. 69.5 [66.25, 75.8] mmHg, P < 0.001) and generalized ARV of MBP (1.42 ± 0.49 vs. 1.66 ± 0.52 mmHg/min, P = 0.036). The remimazolam group required less phenylephrine (20 [0, 65] vs. 100 [60, 130] μg, P < 0.001), less norepinephrine (162 [0, 365.5] vs. 1335 [998.5, 1637.5] μg, P < 0.001), and more remifentanil (1750 [1454.5, 2184.5] vs. 531 [431, 746.5] μg, P < 0.001) than the control group. Conclusions Remimazolam anesthesia may provide better hemodynamic stability during cerebrovascular bypass surgery than propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia.

Background: Maintenance of stable blood pressure (BP) during cerebrovascular bypass surgery is crucial to prevent cerebral ischemia. We compared the effect of remimazolam anesthesia with that of propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia on intraoperative hemodynamic stability and the need for vasoactive agents in patients undergoing cerebrovascular bypass surgery. Methods: Sixty-five patients were randomized into remimazolam (n = 31, remimazolam-based intravenous anesthesia) and control groups (n = 34, propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia). The primary outcome was the occurrence of intraoperative hypotension. The secondary outcomes included hypotension duration, lowest mean BP (MBP), generalized average real variability (ARV) of MBP, and consumption of phenylephrine, norepinephrine, or remifentanil. Results: Occurrence rate and duration of hypotension were significantly lower in the remimazolam group (38.7% vs. 73.5%, P = 0.005; 0 [0, 10] vs. 7.5 [1.25, 25] min, P = 0.008). Remimazolam also showed better outcomes for lowest MBP (78 [73, 84] vs. 69.5 [66.25, 75.8] mmHg, P < 0.001) and generalized ARV of MBP (1.42 ± 0.49 vs. 1.66 ± 0.52 mmHg/min, P = 0.036). The remimazolam group required less phenylephrine (20 [0, 65] vs. 100 [60, 130] μg, P < 0.001), less norepinephrine (162 [0, 365.5] vs. 1335 [998.5, 1637.5] μg, P < 0.001), and more remifentanil (1750 [1454.5, 2184.5] vs. 531 [431, 746.5] μg, P < 0.001) than the control group. Conclusions Remimazolam anesthesia may provide better hemodynamic stability during cerebrovascular bypass surgery than propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia.

Background: Maintenance of stable blood pressure (BP) during cerebrovascular bypass surgery is crucial to prevent cerebral ischemia. We compared the effect of remimazolam anesthesia with that of propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia on intraoperative hemodynamic stability and the need for vasoactive agents in patients undergoing cerebrovascular bypass surgery. Methods: Sixty-five patients were randomized into remimazolam (n = 31, remimazolam-based intravenous anesthesia) and control groups (n = 34, propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia). The primary outcome was the occurrence of intraoperative hypotension. The secondary outcomes included hypotension duration, lowest mean BP (MBP), generalized average real variability (ARV) of MBP, and consumption of phenylephrine, norepinephrine, or remifentanil. Results: Occurrence rate and duration of hypotension were significantly lower in the remimazolam group (38.7% vs. 73.5%, P = 0.005; 0 [0, 10] vs. 7.5 [1.25, 25] min, P = 0.008). Remimazolam also showed better outcomes for lowest MBP (78 [73, 84] vs. 69.5 [66.25, 75.8] mmHg, P < 0.001) and generalized ARV of MBP (1.42 ± 0.49 vs. 1.66 ± 0.52 mmHg/min, P = 0.036). The remimazolam group required less phenylephrine (20 [0, 65] vs. 100 [60, 130] μg, P < 0.001), less norepinephrine (162 [0, 365.5] vs. 1335 [998.5, 1637.5] μg, P < 0.001), and more remifentanil (1750 [1454.5, 2184.5] vs. 531 [431, 746.5] μg, P < 0.001) than the control group. Conclusions Remimazolam anesthesia may provide better hemodynamic stability during cerebrovascular bypass surgery than propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia.

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.

Background: Maintenance of stable blood pressure (BP) during cerebrovascular bypass surgery is crucial to prevent cerebral ischemia. We compared the effect of remimazolam anesthesia with that of propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia on intraoperative hemodynamic stability and the need for vasoactive agents in patients undergoing cerebrovascular bypass surgery. Methods: Sixty-five patients were randomized into remimazolam (n = 31, remimazolam-based intravenous anesthesia) and control groups (n = 34, propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia). The primary outcome was the occurrence of intraoperative hypotension. The secondary outcomes included hypotension duration, lowest mean BP (MBP), generalized average real variability (ARV) of MBP, and consumption of phenylephrine, norepinephrine, or remifentanil. Results: Occurrence rate and duration of hypotension were significantly lower in the remimazolam group (38.7% vs. 73.5%, P = 0.005; 0 [0, 10] vs. 7.5 [1.25, 25] min, P = 0.008). Remimazolam also showed better outcomes for lowest MBP (78 [73, 84] vs. 69.5 [66.25, 75.8] mmHg, P < 0.001) and generalized ARV of MBP (1.42 ± 0.49 vs. 1.66 ± 0.52 mmHg/min, P = 0.036). The remimazolam group required less phenylephrine (20 [0, 65] vs. 100 [60, 130] μg, P < 0.001), less norepinephrine (162 [0, 365.5] vs. 1335 [998.5, 1637.5] μg, P < 0.001), and more remifentanil (1750 [1454.5, 2184.5] vs. 531 [431, 746.5] μg, P < 0.001) than the control group. Conclusions Remimazolam anesthesia may provide better hemodynamic stability during cerebrovascular bypass surgery than propofol-induced and desflurane-maintained anesthesia.

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.

Afferent loop syndrome (ALS) is a rare complication of gastrectomies and gastrointestinal reconstruction. This can predispose patients to fatal conditions, such as cholangitis, pancreatitis, and duodenal perforation with peritonitis. Therefore, emergency decompression is necessary to prevent these complications. Herein, we report two cases in which transcholecystic duodenal drainage, an alternative decompression treatment, was performed in ALS patients without bile duct dilatation. Two patients who underwent distal gastrectomy with Billroth II anastomosis sought consultation in an emergency department for epigastric pain and vomiting. On CT, ALS with acute pancreatitis was diagnosed. However, biliary access could not be achieved because of the absence of bile duct dilatation. To overcome this problem, a duodenal drainage catheter was placed to decompress the afferent loop after traversing the cystic duct via a transcholecystic approach. The patients were discharged without additional surgical treatment 2 weeks and 1 month after drainage.

Objective: This study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone (160 mg/day) compared to quetiapine XR (QXR; 600 mg/day) in the treatment of acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone 160 mg/day (n=105) or QXR 600 mg/day (n=105). Primary efficacy measure was the change from baseline to week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score and Clinical Global Impressions severity (CGI-S) score. Adverse events, body measurements, and laboratory parameters were assessed. Results: Lurasidone demonstrated non-inferiority to QXR on the PANSS total score. Adjusted mean±standard error change at week 6 on the PANSS total score was -26.42±2.02 and -27.33±2.01 in the lurasidone and QXR group, respectively. The mean difference score was -0.91 (95% confidence interval -6.35–4.53). The lurasidone group showed a greater reduction in PANSS total and negative subscale on week 1 and a greater reduction in end-point CGI-S score compared to the QXR group. Body weight, body mass index, and waist circumference in the lurasidone group were reduced, with significantly lower mean change compared to QXR. Endpoint changes in glucose, cholesterol, triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein levels were also significantly lower. The most common adverse drug reactions with lurasidone were akathisia and nausea. Conclusion Lurasidone 160 mg/day was found to be non-inferior to QXR 600 mg/day in the treatment of schizophrenia with comparable efficacy and tolerability. Adverse effects of lurasidone were generally tolerable, and beneficial effects on metabolic parameters can be expected.