DEATH OF PATIENT.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20541, 16 February 1935, Page 17

DEATH OF PATIENT.

Unusual Condition Caused Collapse. FINDING AT INQUEST. A verdict that death was due to the failure of the respiratory and heart centres brought about by an anaesthetic and shock, associated with a condition of status lymphaticus, was returned by the Coroner, Mr E. Mosley, at the inquest on Ernest William Armiger, of 147, Riccarton Road, yesterday afternoon. The inquest was opened on January 16, when the Coroner ordered a post mortem examination to be made. Mr Armiger attended the dental rooms of Mr E. A. Suckling, on January 14, to have two wisdom teeth extracted. The anaesthetist was Dr Robinson E. Hall. One of the teeth ffad been extracted when the patient’s respiration faltered. Every possible means of respiration was resorted to, but without success. Ernest Arthur Suckling, a dental surgeon, said that at 11 a.m. on Monday, January 14, he had started an operation on Armiger. He was to have two impacted teeth removed. Dr Robinson E. Hall administered the anaesthetic. Everything went well until about noon, when Dr Hall noticed that the patient collapsed. Witness stopped, and after a few minutes Dr Hall motioned him to carry on. The patient had showed signs of improvement. There had not been any further anaesthetic administered. One tooth had been removed and he was just taking out the second. He had been working again for about half a minute when Dr Hall stopped him again and began applying artificial respiration. An injection of strychnine was given, followed by administrations of oxygen. Later, camphor in oil was injected and Dr Aitken was called in. He gave the patient an injection of adrenalin. Artificial respiration was continued for about an hour, but the patient did not recover. Difficult Operation.

Mr J. D. Hutchison (who appeared on behalf of the relatives) : Is the removal of two of these teeth usually a difficult operation f Witness explained that it was so difficult that the patient had been sent to him as a specialist. A dental institution had advised this course. The operation was far too difficult for the use of gas and oxygen. There was no necessity for two operations. From the very beginning deceased had not appeared to be a good patient. Mr Hutchison: Did you see any reason why the operation should not be contins.ied ? Witness; No. Dr Robinson E. Hall stated that he had administered the anaesthetic to Mr Armiger. Uhe patient had taken the anaesthetic very well. The operation had been in progress for forty minutes, when witness noticed that the patient’s breathing was becoming shallow. He then asked Mir Suckling to remove the inhaler. Normal breathing was recovered very quickly, and the pulse became normal. He asked Mr Suckling how much morel he had to do. Mr Suckling replied thatf he thought he could lift the second tooth. Witness told him to go ahead an*f try, but did not administer further ay^esthetic. To the Coroner; I gave the patient the routine examination and examined the heart and cheat. One hour before the operation a hypodermic was administered. In reply to Mr Hfcitchison. Dr Hall stated that it was probable that the patient would have recovered had not the removal of the second tooth been continued after the fuast signs of col’apse. Dr A. B. Pearson, pathologist at Christchurch Public Hpspital, stated that he had conducted a post-mortem examination. He considered death due to failure of respiratory ar*l heart centres, brought about by anaesthesia. The patient had had a condition of status lymphaticus. Mr Hutchison: Is that a rare condition. Dr Pearson : It is in an adu%, but not so rare in young adolescent people. Its existence was a dangeroijs factor when an anaesthetic was being" administered, stated Dr Pearson. Mr .Armiger was above the age at which the rendition might be expected. He diH not think science was advancing 4n its ability to diagnose the symptoms of the disease. Mr Mosley: Like many other c&ses, we have to take the chance. “It is one of the unfortunate, I might say. accidents which is always attendant upon operations of tnbis kind.” said the Coroner, giving hit: verdict. “No doubt it will have comp as a shock to the parents, especiallv as. he was in the hands of specialists such as Dr Hall and Mr Suckling. Considerable light has been thrown upon the matter by Dr Pearson’s report, and I am sure the parents are much more satisfied than they would have been, but for the report.” The Coroner then gave his verdict.