The objective of the present study was to evaluate memory performance in tasks with and without affective content (to confirm the mood congruency phenomenon) in acutely admitted patients with bipolar I disorder (BD) and major depression disorder (MDD) and in healthy participants. Seventy-eight participants (24 BD, 29 MDD, and 25 healthy controls) were evaluated. Three word lists were used as the memory task with affective content (positive, negative and indifferent). Psychiatric symptoms were also evaluated with rating scales (Young Mania Rating Scale for mania and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale for depression). Patients were selected during the first week of hospitalization. BD patients showed higher scores in the word span with positive tone than MDD patients and healthy controls (P = 0.002). No other difference was observed for tests with affective tone. MDD patients presented significantly lower scores in the Mini-Mental State Exam, logical memory test, visual recognition span, and digit span, while BD patients presented lower scores in the visual recognition test and digit span. Mood congruency effect was found for word span with positive tone among BD patients but no similar effect was observed among MDD patients for negative items. MDD patients presented more memory impairment than BD patients, but BD patients also showed memory impairment

We evaluated the effects of the neuroleptic agent propericiazine on animal models of anxiety and memory. Adult male Wistar rats (250 to 350 g) received intraperitoneal injections of propericiazine (0.05, 0.075 and 0.1 mg/kg), diazepam (1 mg/kg), saline, or diazepam vehicle (20% propylene glycol and 80% saline) 30 min prior to the experimental procedure. Animals (10-15 for each task) were tested for step-down inhibitory avoidance (0.3-mA footshock) and habituation to an open-field for memory assessment, and submitted to the elevated plus-maze to evaluate the effects of propericiazine in a model of anxiety. Animals treated with 0.075 mg/kg propericiazine showed a reduction in anxiety measures (P<0.05) similar to that observed in those treated with diazepam. Propericiazine at the doses of 0.05 and 0.1 mg/kg had no significant anxiolytic effects (P>0.05) in the elevated plus-maze model of anxiety. Memory was not affected by propericiazine in any of the tests, but was impaired by diazepam. The results indicate a dose-related, inverse U-shaped effect of propericiazine in an anxiety model, but not on memory tasks, perhaps reflecting involvement of the dopaminergic system in the mechanisms of anxiety.

Mirtazapine is an antidepressant whose side effect profile differs from that of first-line agents (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) used in the treatment of panic disorder. The present study compared the effect of mirtazapine and fluoxetine in the treatment of panic disorder in a double-blind, randomized, flexible-dose trial conducted with outpatients. After a 1-week single-blind placebo run-in, 27 patients entered an 8-week double-blind phase in which they were randomly assigned to treatment with either mirtazapine or fluoxetine. Both groups improved significantly in all but one efficacy measure (P<=0.01). ANOVA showed no significant differences between the two treatment groups in number of panic attacks, Hamilton Anxiety Scale or Sheehan Phobic Scale, whereas measures of patient global evaluation of phobic anxiety were significantly different between groups (F1,20 = 6.91, P = 0.016) favoring mirtazapine. For the 22 patients who completed the study, the mean daily dose of mirtazapine was 18.3 ± 1.3 vs 14.0 ± 1.0 mg for fluoxetine at the endpoint. Weight gain occurred more frequently in the mirtazapine group (50 vs 7.7%, P = 0.04) and nausea and paresthesia occurred more often in the fluoxetine group (P = 0.01). Results suggest that mirtazapine has properties that make it attractive for the treatment of panic disorder.