Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Acta Neurologica Belgica 2/2017

Open Access 01-06-2017 | Original Article

Clinical predictors and differential diagnosis of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome

Authors: Laetitia della Faille, S. Fieuws, W. Van Paesschen

Published in: Acta Neurologica Belgica | Issue 2/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

The aim of our study is to determine the clinical predictors and the differential diagnosis of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) in patients presenting with acute neurological symptoms and risk factors for PRES. Using the diagnostic algorithm for PRES from Fugate and Rabinstein (Lancet Neurol 14(9):914–925, 1), we carried out a retrospective study on 220 patients, presenting with acute neurological symptoms such as seizures, encephalopathy, headache, visual disturbances or other focal neurological signs that appear in the clinical setting of risk factors such as hypertension/blood pressure fluctuations, chemotherapy, renal failure, autoimmune disorders, or eclampsia, in whom imaging of the brain was performed to exclude PRES. Seventeen percent of patients had a radiologically confirmed diagnosis of PRES. Univariable logistic regression showed a significant association between PRES and epileptic seizures, encephalopathy, hypertension, chemotherapy and renal failure. Multivariable logistic regression of acute neurological symptoms and risk factors showed a significant association of epileptic seizures, encephalopathy, visual disturbances, hypertension and chemotherapy with PRES. Using these variables to predict PRES yielded a discriminative ability (AUC) equal to 0.793. Diagnoses when PRES was not confirmed included primary or secondary headaches (26%), toxic-metabolic encephalopathy (21%), vascular pathology (12%) and other less frequent disorders. Epileptic seizures, encephalopathy, visual disturbances, hypertension, renal failure and chemotherapy were the best clinical predictors of PRES, while headache, immune suppression and autoimmune disease were not useful for the clinical diagnosis of PRES in our study.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Hinchey JMD, Chaves CMD, Appiggnani BMD et al (1996) A reversible posterior encephalopathy syndrome. N Engl J Med 1996:494–500 Hinchey JMD, Chaves CMD, Appiggnani BMD et al (1996) A reversible posterior encephalopathy syndrome. N Engl J Med 1996:494–500
4.
go back to reference Sauerbrei W (1999) The use of resampling methods to simplify regression models in medical statistics. Appl Stat 1999:313–329 Sauerbrei W (1999) The use of resampling methods to simplify regression models in medical statistics. Appl Stat 1999:313–329
5.
go back to reference Steyerberg EW (2009) Clinical prediction models: a practical approach to development, validation, and updating, 1st edn. Springer, New YorkCrossRef Steyerberg EW (2009) Clinical prediction models: a practical approach to development, validation, and updating, 1st edn. Springer, New YorkCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Liman TG, Bohner G, Heuschmann PU, Endres M, Siebert E (2012) The clinical and radiological spectrum of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome: the retrospective Berlin PRES study. 2012:155–164. doi:10.1007/s00415-011-6152-4 Liman TG, Bohner G, Heuschmann PU, Endres M, Siebert E (2012) The clinical and radiological spectrum of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome: the retrospective Berlin PRES study. 2012:155–164. doi:10.​1007/​s00415-011-6152-4
8.
Metadata
Title
Clinical predictors and differential diagnosis of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome
Authors
Laetitia della Faille
S. Fieuws
W. Van Paesschen
Publication date
01-06-2017
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Acta Neurologica Belgica / Issue 2/2017
Print ISSN: 0300-9009
Electronic ISSN: 2240-2993
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13760-017-0750-6

Other articles of this Issue 2/2017

Acta Neurologica Belgica 2/2017 Go to the issue