Conus medullaris injury following both tetracaine and lidocaine spinal anesthesia

Multiple reports of cauda equina syndrome and transient radicular nerve root irritation have suggested that lidocaine spinal anesthesia may be responsible. In this case report, a patient with a preexisting diabetic neuropathy received a partial block following a tetracaine spinal, which was followed by a lidocaine spinal. Following block resolution, a new conus medullaris syndrome was diagnosed. Because of the close proximity of the cauda equina and the conus medullaris, differentiation between these syndromes can be difficult. The preexisting diabetic neuropathy may have predisposed this patient to neurologic injury. The choice of a different local anesthetic drug with less neurotoxic potential such as bupivacaine may have prevented this injury.     

Comparison of the use of nalbuphine and fentanyl during third molar surgery

In a double-blind, randomized plan of drug administration, nalbuphine, fentanyl, and a placebo were compared for efficacy in sedation and analgesia during third molar removal. Fifty-eight patients participated in this study. Using accepted intravenous sedation and surgical techniques, fentanyl and nalbuphine were found to be better than placebo for anxiety and pain control in third molar surgery. Fentanyl had a longer duration of pain relief postoperatively than did nalbuphine. The study confirmed the need for a narcotic supplement to sedation techniques for third molar surgery.     

Differentiation between organic and functional psychiatric illness in the elderly: An evaluation of four cognitive tests

One hundred and sixty-four patients admitted to a psychogeriatric unit were given a combination of four different cognitive tests: the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Abbreviated Mental Test Score, The Felix Post Unit Score and the compilation of tests recommended by the MRC Alzheimer's Disease Workshop. The tests were compared with respect to their ability to sort accurately cases of dementia and depression, and the effects of age and education on test score and misclassification rate with diagnosis controlled for. The MMSE had a very high misclassification rate for the poorly educated and depressed group. The logistical discriminant functional analysis selected only eight items as the best discriminators between organic/ functional or dementia/depression groups. Only one of these eight was not either a memory or orientation test. The value of simply adding up tests of different aspects of cognitive function in dementia assessment or screening is questioned.