Long-term risk of seizure after posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) can develop seizures during the acute phase. We sought to determine the long-term risk of seizure after PRES. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using statewide all-payer claims data from 2016-2018 from nonfederal hospitals in 11 US states. Adults admitted with PRES were compared to adults admitted with stroke, an acute cerebrovascular disorder associated with long-term risk of seizure. The primary outcome was seizure diagnosed during an emergency room visit or hospital admission after the index hospitalization. The secondary outcome was status epilepticus. Diagnoses were determined using previously validated ICD-10-CM codes. Patients with seizure diagnoses before or during the index admission were excluded. We used Cox regression to evaluate the association of PRES with seizure, adjusting for demographics and potential confounders. RESULTS: We identified 2095 patients hospitalized with PRES and 341,809 with stroke. Median follow-up was 0.9 years (IQR, 0.3-1.7) in the PRES group and 1.0 years (IQR, 0.4-1.8) in the stroke group. Crude seizure incidence per 100 person-years was 9.5 after PRES and 2.5 after stroke. After adjustment for demographics and comorbidities, patients with PRES had a higher risk of seizure than patients with stroke (HR, 2.9; 95% CI, 2.6-3.4). Results were unchanged in a sensitivity analysis that applied a two-week washout period to mitigate detection bias. A similar relationship was observed for the secondary outcome of status epilepticus. INTERPRETATION: PRES was associated with an increased long-term risk of subsequent acute care utilization for seizure compared to stroke.

Risk of Stroke After Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) can cause short-term cerebrovascular complications, such as brain infarction and hemorrhage. We hypothesized that PRES is also associated with an increased long-term risk of stroke. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study in the United States using statewide all-payer claims data from 2016 to 2018 on all admissions to nonfederal hospitals in 11 states. Adults with PRES were compared with adults with renal colic (negative control) and transient ischemic attack (TIA; positive control). Any stroke and the secondary outcomes of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke were ascertained using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. We excluded prevalent stroke. We used time-to-event statistics to calculate incidence rates and Cox proportional hazards analyses to evaluate the association between PRES and stroke, adjusting for demographics and stroke risk factors. In a sensitivity analysis, outcomes within 2 weeks of index admission were excluded. RESULTS: We identified 1606 patients with PRES, 1192 with renal colic, and 38 216 with TIA. Patients with PRES had a mean age of 56±17 years; 72% were women. Over a median follow-up of 0.9 years, the stroke incidence per 100 person-years was 6.1 (95% CI, 5.0-7.4) after PRES, 1.0 (95% CI, 0.62-1.8) after renal colic, and 9.7 (95% CI, 9.4-10.0) after TIA. After statistical adjustment for patient characteristics and risk factors, patients with PRES had an elevated risk of stroke compared with renal colic (hazard ratio [HR], 2.3 [95% CI, 1.7-3.0]), but lower risk than patients with TIA (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.54-0.82]). In secondary analyses, compared with TIA, PRES was associated with hemorrhagic stroke (HR, 2.0 [95% CI, 1.4-2.9]). PRES was associated with ischemic stroke when compared with renal colic (HR, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.4-2.7]) but not when compared with TIA (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.38-0.63]). Results were similar with 2-week washout. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PRES had an elevated risk of incident stroke.

Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review provides an updated discussion on the clinical presentation, diagnosis and radiographic features, mechanisms, associations and epidemiology, treatment, and prognosis of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES). Headache is common in PRES, though headache associated with PRES was not identified as a separate entity in the 2018 International Classification of Headache Disorders. Here, we review the relevant literature and suggest criteria for consideration of its inclusion. RECENT FINDINGS: COVID-19 has been identified as a potential risk factor for PRES, with a prevalence of 1-4% in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection undergoing neuroimaging, thus making a discussion of its identification and treatment particularly timely given the ongoing global pandemic at the time of this writing. PRES is a neuro-clinical syndrome with specific imaging findings. The clinical manifestations of PRES include headache, seizures, encephalopathy, visual disturbances, and focal neurologic deficits. Associations with PRES include renal failure, preeclampsia and eclampsia, autoimmune conditions, and immunosuppression. PRES is theorized to be a syndrome of disordered autoregulation and endothelial dysfunction resulting in preferential hyperperfusion of the posterior circulation. Treatment typically focuses on treating the underlying cause and removal of the offending agents.

Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To report four patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who developed posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES). METHODS: Patient data was abstracted from medical records at Weill Cornell Medical Center. RESULTS: Four patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and PRES were identified. The patients' ages ranged from 64 to 74 years, and two were women. All four patients were admitted to the hospital with acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring intensive care unit admission and mechanical ventilation. PRES was diagnosed after persistent confusion, lethargy, new focal neurological deficits, or seizures were noted, with evidence of seizures on electroencephalogram for two of the patients. Imaging confirmed the presence of cerebral vasogenic edema. All four patients had elevated blood pressure and renal injury in the days preceding PRES diagnosis, as well as evidence of systemic inflammation and systemic hypercoagulability. Symptoms of PRES improved with blood pressure control. CONCLUSIONS: Our four cases demonstrate the occurrence of PRES in critically-ill patients with COVID-19. PRES should be considered in the differential for acute neurological deficits and seizures in this setting.