Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/24244
Title: Clinical predictors and differential diagnosis of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome
Authors: della Faille, Laetitia
FIEUWS, Steffen 
Van Paesschen, W.
Issue Date: 2017
Publisher: SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
Source: ACTA NEUROLOGICA BELGICA, 117(2), p. 469-475
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.
Notes: [della Faille, Laetitia; Van Paesschen, W.] Univ Leuven, KU Leuven, Div Neurol, Univ Hosp Leuven, Louvain, Belgium. [Fieuws, S.] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Interuniv Inst Biostat & Stat Bioinformat, Leuven, Belgium. [Fieuws, S.] Hasselt Univ, Leuven, Belgium.
Keywords: PRES; Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome; Imaging; Clinical predictors; Diagnosis;PRES; posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome; imaging; clinical predictors; diagnosis
Document URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/24244
ISSN: 0300-9009
e-ISSN: 2240-2993
DOI: 10.1007/s13760-017-0750-6
ISI #: 000401938600007
Rights: Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://crea tivecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Category: A1
Type: Journal Contribution
Validations: ecoom 2018
Appears in Collections:Research publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
111.pdfPublished version1.32 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show full item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

11
checked on Sep 2, 2020

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

15
checked on May 21, 2022

Page view(s)

50
checked on May 19, 2022

Download(s)

88
checked on May 19, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.