Search

Abstract Background The distinction between bipolar I and bipolar II disorder and its treatment implications have been a matter of ongoing debate. The aim of this study was to examine differences between patients with bipolar I and II disorders with particular emphasis on the early phases of the disorders. Methods 808 subjects diagnosed with bipolar I (N = 587) or bipolar II disorder (N = 221) according to DSM-IV criteria were recruited between April 1994 and March 2022 from tertiary-level mood disorder clinics. Sociodemographic and clinical variables concerning psychiatric and medical comorbidities, family history, illness course, suicidal behavior, and response to treatment were compared between the bipolar disorder types. Results Bipolar II disorder patients were more frequently women, older, married or widowed. Bipolar II disorder was associated with later “bipolar” presentation, higher age at first (hypo)mania and treatment, less frequent referral after a single episode, and more episodes before lithium treatment. A higher proportion of first-degree relatives of bipolar II patients were affected by major depression and anxiety disorders. The course of bipolar II disorder was typically characterized by depressive onset, early depressive episodes, multiple depressive recurrences, and depressive predominant polarity; less often by (hypo)mania or (hypo)mania-depression cycles at onset or during the early course. The lifetime clinical course was more frequently rated as chronic fluctuating than episodic. More patients with bipolar II disorder had a history of rapid cycling and/or high number of episodes. Mood stabilizers and antipsychotics were prescribed less frequently during the early course of bipolar II disorder, while antidepressants were more common. We found no differences in global functioning, lifetime suicide attempts, family history of suicide, age at onset of mood disorders and depressive episodes, and lithium response. Conclusions Differences between bipolar I and II disorders are not limited to the severity of (hypo)manic syndromes but include patterns of clinical course and family history. Caution in the use of potentially mood-destabilizing agents is warranted during the early course of bipolar II disorder.

Background: The distinction between bipolar I and bipolar II disorder and its treatment implications have been a matter of ongoing debate. The aim of this study was to examine differences between patients with bipolar I and II disorders with particular emphasis on the early phases of the disorders. Methods: 808 subjects diagnosed with bipolar I (N = 587) or bipolar II disorder (N = 221) according to DSM-IV criteria were recruited between April 1994 and March 2022 from tertiary-level mood disorder clinics. Sociodemographic and clinical variables concerning psychiatric and medical comorbidities, family history, illness course, suicidal behavior, and response to treatment were compared between the bipolar disorder types. Results: Bipolar II disorder patients were more frequently women, older, married or widowed. Bipolar II disorder was associated with later "bipolar" presentation, higher age at first (hypo)mania and treatment, less frequent referral after a single episode, and more episodes before lithium treatment. A higher proportion of first-degree relatives of bipolar II patients were affected by major depression and anxiety disorders. The course of bipolar II disorder was typically characterized by depressive onset, early depressive episodes, multiple depressive recurrences, and depressive predominant polarity; less often by (hypo)mania or (hypo)mania-depression cycles at onset or during the early course. The lifetime clinical course was more frequently rated as chronic fluctuating than episodic. More patients with bipolar II disorder had a history of rapid cycling and/or high number of episodes. Mood stabilizers and antipsychotics were prescribed less frequently during the early course of bipolar II disorder, while antidepressants were more common. We found no differences in global functioning, lifetime suicide attempts, family history of suicide, age at onset of mood disorders and depressive episodes, and lithium response. Conclusions: Differences between bipolar I and II disorders are not limited to the severity of (hypo)manic syndromes but include patterns of clinical course and family history. Caution in the use of potentially mood-destabilizing agents is warranted during the early course of bipolar II disorder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Differences between BD-I and BD-II patients with regard to specific illness characteristics are poorly understood. Objectives: This study is mainly aimed to compare sociodemographic and clinical characteristics between BD-I and BD-II patients with the goal of clarifying possible predictors of clinical course. Methods: The sample of this cohort study is composed of 387 currently euthymic bipolar patients. Participants were all receiving only maintenance treatment; their psychopharmacological regimens and psychopathological conditions were stable at assessment. Results: BD-II patients were more likely to be female, had more frequently a recent depressive episode and substance abuse/dependence relative to BD-I. BD-II patients were also less likely to have a positive history of psychiatric conditions in family, psychotic symptoms at first episode, and first depressive illness episode. Moreover, BD-II were older at their illness onset and first treatment than BD-I patients. Furthermore, BD-I were more likely to have higher depressive, manic, anxiety, and symptoms severity than BD-I patients. Being female (OR=.289), having psychiatric conditions in family (OR=.273), and higher severity of illness at CGI (OR=.604) were all significantly associated with BD-II. Conclusions: Additional studies are required to replicate these results, and facilitate the prediction of BD outcomes according to the specified profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Differential characteristics between BD-I and BD-II patients were documented. • Being female, having psychiatric family conditions, and higher illness severity were linked to BD-II. • Substantial clinical differences may help to characterize bipolar subgroups. Differences between BD-I and BD-II patients with regard to specific illness characteristics are poorly understood. This study is mainly aimed to compare socio-demographic and clinical characteristics between BD-I and BD-II patients with the goal of clarifying possible predictors of clinical course. The sample of this cohort study is composed of 391 currently euthymic bipolar patients. Participants were all receiving only maintenance treatment; their psychopharmacological regimens and psychopathological conditions were stable at assessment. After univariate analyses, BD-II patients were more likely to be female, had more frequently a recent depressive episode and substance abuse/dependence relative to BD-I subjects. BD-II patients were also less likely to have a positive history of psychiatric conditions in family, psychotic symptoms at first episode, and first depressive illness episode. Moreover, BD-II were older at their illness onset and first treatment than BD-I patients. Furthermore, BD-I were more likely to have higher depressive, manic, anxiety, and symptoms severity than BD-II patients. After logistic regression analyses, being female (OR = 0.289), having psychiatric conditions in family (OR = 0.273), and higher severity of illness at CGI (OR = 0.604) were all significantly associated with BD-II. Additional studies are required to replicate these results, and facilitate the prediction of BD outcomes according to the specified profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]