Article

Bipolar II disorder : epidemiology, diagnosis and management.

Hecker Psychiatry Research Center, a University of California at San Diego (USA) Collaborating Center at Forli, Italy.
CNS Drugs (Impact Factor: 4.38). 02/2007; 21(9):727-40.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Bipolar II disorder (BP-II) is defined, by DSM-IV, as recurrent episodes of depression and hypomania. Hypomania, according to DSM-IV, requires elevated (euphoric) and/or irritable mood, plus at least three of the following symptoms (four if mood is only irritable): grandiosity, decreased need for sleep, increased talking, racing thoughts, distractibility, overactivity (an increase in goal-directed activity), psychomotor agitation and excessive involvement in risky activities. This observable change in functioning should not be severe enough to cause marked impairment of social or occupational functioning, or to require hospitalisation. The distinction between BP-II and bipolar I disorder (BP-I) is not clearcut. The symptoms of mania (defining BP-I) and hypomania (defining BP-II) are the same, apart from the presence of psychosis in mania, and the distinction is based on the presence of marked impairment associated with mania, i.e. mania is more severe and may require hospitalisation. This is an unclear boundary that can lead to misclassification; however, the fact that hypomania often increases functioning makes the distinction between mania and hypomania clearer. BP-II depression can be syndromal and subsyndromal, and it is the prominent feature of BP-II. It is often a mixed depression, i.e. it has concurrent, usually subsyndromal, hypomanic symptoms. It is the depression that usually leads the patient to seek treatment.DSM-IV bipolar disorders (BP-I, BP-II, cyclothymic disorder and bipolar disorder not otherwise classified, which includes very rapid cycling and recurrent hypomania) are now considered to be part of the 'bipolar spectrum'. This is not included in DSM-IV, but is thought to also include antidepressant/substance-associated hypomania, cyclothymic temperament (a trait of highly unstable mood, thinking and behaviour), unipolar mixed depression and highly recurrent unipolar depression.BP-II is underdiagnosed in clinical practice, and its pharmacological treatment is understudied. Underdiagnosis is demonstrated by recent epidemiological studies. While, in DSM-IV, BP-II is reported to have a lifetime community prevalence of 0.5%, epidemiological studies have instead found that it has a lifetime community prevalence (including the bipolar spectrum) of around 5%. In depressed outpatients, one in two may have BP-II. The recent increased diagnosing of BP-II in research settings is related to several factors, including the introduction of the use of semi-structured interviews by trained research clinicians, a relaxation of diagnostic criteria such that the minimum duration of hypomania is now less than the 4 days stipulated by DSM-IV, and a probing for a history of hypomania focused more on overactivity (increased goal-directed activity) than on mood change (although this is still required for a diagnosis of hypomania). Guidelines on the treatment of BP-II are mainly consensus based and tend to follow those for the treatment of BP-I, because there have been few controlled studies of the treatment of BP-II. The current, limited evidence supports the following lines of treatment for BP-II. Hypomania is likely to respond to the same agents useful for mania, i.e. mood-stabilising agents such as lithium and valproate, and the second-generation antipsychotics (i.e. olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, ziprasidone, aripiprazole). Hypomania should be treated even if associated with overfunctioning, because a depression often soon follows hypomania (the hypomania-depression cycle). For the treatment of acute BP-II depression, two controlled studies of quetiapine have not found clearcut positive effects. Naturalistic studies, although open to several biases, have found antidepressants in acute BP-II depression to be as effective as in unipolar depression; however, one recent large controlled study (mainly in patients with BP-I) has found antidepressants to be no more effective than placebo. Results from naturalistic studies and clinical observations on mixed depression, while in need of replication in controlled studies, indicate that antidepressants may worsen the concurrent intradepression hypomanic symptoms. The only preventive treatment for both depression and hypomania that is supported by several, albeit older, controlled studies is lithium. Lamotrigine has shown some efficacy in delaying depression recurrences, but there have also been several negative unpublished studies of the drug in this indication.

6 Followers
 · 
317 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bipolar disorder is a chronic episodic illness, characterized by recurrent episodes of manic or depressive symptoms. Patients with bipolar disorder frequently present first to primary care, but the diversity of the potential symptoms and a low index of suspicion among physicians can lead to misdiagnosis in many patients. Frequently, co-occurring psychiatric and medical conditions further complicate the differential diagnosis. A thorough diagnostic evaluation at clinical interview, combined with supportive case-finding tools, is essential to reach an accurate diagnosis. When treating bipolar patients, the primary care physician has an integral role in coordinating the multidisciplinary network. Pharmacologic treatment underpins both short- and long-term management of bipolar disorder. Maintenance treatment to prevent relapse is frequently founded on the same pharmacologic approaches that were effective in treating the acute symptoms. Regardless of the treatment approach that is selected, monitoring over the long term is essential to ensure continued symptom relief, functioning, safety, adherence, and general medical health. This article describes key decision-making steps in the management of bipolar disorder from the primary care perspective: from initial clinical suspicion to confirmation of the diagnosis to decision-making in acute and longer-term management and the importance of patient monitoring.
    06/2014; 16(3). DOI:10.4088/PCC.13r01609
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite being present in up to 1% of the population, few controlled trials have examined the efficacy of treatments for bipolar II depression. Pooled data are presented from four placebo-controlled studies (BOLDER I [5077US/0049] and II [D1447C00135]; EMBOLDEN I [D1447C00001] and II [D1447C00134]) that evaluated the efficacy of quetiapine monotherapy for depressive episodes in patients with bipolar II disorder. All studies included an 8-week, double-blind treatment phase in which patients were randomly assigned to treatment with quetiapine 300 mg/day, quetiapine 600 mg/day, or placebo. Outcome measures included the change from baseline in MADRS total score at week 8, effect sizes, and MADRS response and remission rates. Improvements in mean MADRS total scores from baseline to week 8 were significantly greater with quetiapine 300 and 600 mg/day (-15.58 [n = 283] and -14.88 [n = 289]; p < 0.001) compared with placebo (-11.61 [n = 204]). The MADRS effect sizes were 0.44 for quetiapine 300 mg/day and 0.47 for 600 mg/day (p < 0.001 vs placebo). Significantly higher proportions of patients receiving quetiapine, at both doses, than placebo-treated patients achieved response and remission at week 8 (p < 0.01). Common adverse events associated with quetiapine (both doses) included dry mouth, somnolence, sedation, dizziness, and headache. Rates of mania and hypomania were similar for quetiapine and placebo. Quetiapine monotherapy demonstrated significant efficacy compared with placebo and was generally well tolerated in the treatment of bipolar II depression.
    01/2013; 1(1):10. DOI:10.1186/2194-7511-1-10
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bipolar disorder types I (BD I) and II (BD II) behave differently in clinical manifestations, normal personality traits, responses to pharmacotherapies, biochemical backgrounds and neuroimaging activations. How the varied emotional states of BD I and II are related to the comorbid personality disorders remains to be settled. We therefore administered the Plutchick - van Praag Depression Inventory (PVP), the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ), the Hypomanic Checklist-32 (HCL-32), and the Parker Personality Measure (PERM) in 37 patients with BD I, 34 BD II, and in 76 healthy volunteers. Compared to the healthy volunteers, patients with BD I and II scored higher on some PERM styles, PVP, MDQ and HCL-32 scales. In BD I, the PERM Borderline style predicted the PVP scale; and Antisocial predicted HCL-32. In BD II, Borderline, Dependant, Paranoid (-) and Schizoid (-) predicted PVP; Borderline predicted MDQ; Passive-Aggressive and Schizoid (-) predicted HCL-32. In controls, Borderline and Narcissistic (-) predicted PVP; Borderline and Dependant (-) predicted MDQ. Besides confirming the different predictability of the 11 functioning styles of personality disorder to BD I and II, we found that the prediction was more common in BD II, which might underlie its higher risk of suicide and poorer treatment outcome.
    PLoS ONE 01/2015; 10(1):e0117353. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0117353 · 3.53 Impact Factor