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.

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.

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: This study aimed to compare the outcomes and complications of active young adults undergoing open reduction and plate fixation (ORPF) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) for displaced midshaft clavicle fractures (MCFs). Methods: A retrospective review was performed on all patients undergoing ORPF and IMN of complete MCFs at a single center between 2018 and 2022. Patients who were younger than 60 years with radiographic follow-up until union were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 33.1 years. Outcome measures were achievement of union, time to healing, residual deformity, complications, and need for additional procedures. Results: Of 39 patients, 29 underwent ORPF and 10 underwent IMN. Plate fixation provided faster functional recovery in the first 6 months, but no difference was observed after 1 year. All fractures in the IMN group healed (100%), compared to 90% in the ORPF group (P=0.08). Mean time to union was 21±8.9 weeks and was significantly different between the two groups (P<0.01), with the ORPF group averaging 23.1 weeks and the IMN group 20.8 weeks. Nonunion rates were higher in the ORPF group (10.3%) than in the IMN group (0%), but the difference was not significant (P=0.08). Conclusions Both methods restored patients to their pre-injury functional levels. However, IMN, with its higher healing rate, fewer required revision surgeries, and lower incisional numbness, appears to be the preferred method for treating MSFs without comminution in young adults.Level of evidence: III.

Background: This study aimed to compare the outcomes and complications of active young adults undergoing open reduction and plate fixation (ORPF) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) for displaced midshaft clavicle fractures (MCFs). Methods: A retrospective review was performed on all patients undergoing ORPF and IMN of complete MCFs at a single center between 2018 and 2022. Patients who were younger than 60 years with radiographic follow-up until union were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 33.1 years. Outcome measures were achievement of union, time to healing, residual deformity, complications, and need for additional procedures. Results: Of 39 patients, 29 underwent ORPF and 10 underwent IMN. Plate fixation provided faster functional recovery in the first 6 months, but no difference was observed after 1 year. All fractures in the IMN group healed (100%), compared to 90% in the ORPF group (P=0.08). Mean time to union was 21±8.9 weeks and was significantly different between the two groups (P<0.01), with the ORPF group averaging 23.1 weeks and the IMN group 20.8 weeks. Nonunion rates were higher in the ORPF group (10.3%) than in the IMN group (0%), but the difference was not significant (P=0.08). Conclusions Both methods restored patients to their pre-injury functional levels. However, IMN, with its higher healing rate, fewer required revision surgeries, and lower incisional numbness, appears to be the preferred method for treating MSFs without comminution in young adults.Level of evidence: III.