Malhi and coworker’s editorial¹ offers several reasons explaining the decline in the use of lithium to treat Bipolar Disorder (BD) against the recommendation of most international guidelines. Among the reasons, the authors state (1) the lack of “patent” on lithium, (2) its need for monitoring, and (3) concerns about its long‐term adverse effects. Moreover, the authors refer to the displacement of lithium’s prescription in favor of second‐generation antipsychotics (SGA), highlighting that SGA may be useful for the management of BD, but do not confer the same prophylactic effectiveness for BD. While we could not agree more with the authors on this point, we believe that it is important also to remark the benefits of lithium in comparison to mood‐stabilizing anticonvulsants (valproate, lamotrigine, and carbamazepine). We think that these compounds, along with SGA, are the ones that have relegated lithium to a second‐ or even third‐line option for many clinicians treating patients with BD.

中文翻译：

---

评论：“让锂再次变得伟大！”

马利和同事的社论¹提供了几个解释大多数国际准则的建议来解释锂治疗双相情感障碍（BD）使用率下降的原因。在这些原因中，作者指出（1）锂缺乏“专利”，（2）需要监测，以及（3）担心其长期不利影响。此外，作者提到锂替代处方是为了支持第二代抗精神病药（SGA），强调了SGA可能对BD的治疗有用，但并未赋予BD相同的预防效果。尽管我们在这一点上无法与作者达成更多共识，但我们认为，重要的是要指出锂与稳定情绪的抗惊厥药（丙戊酸盐，拉莫三嗪和卡马西平）相比的好处。我们认为这些化合物以及SGA