Next Article in Journal
Elevated Urinary Titin in Adult Spinal Muscular Atrophy: A Multicenter, Cross-Sectional Observational Study
Previous Article in Journal
An Overview About Figure-of-Eight Walk Test in Neurological Disorders: A Scoping Review
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Systematic Review

The Central Variant of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

by
Bahadar S. Srichawla
*,
Maria A. Garcia-Dominguez
and
Brian Silver
Department of Neurology, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, 55 Lake Ave N, Worcester, MA 01655, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Neurol. Int. 2025, 17(7), 113; https://doi.org/10.3390/neurolint17070113
Submission received: 23 June 2025 / Revised: 16 July 2025 / Accepted: 17 July 2025 / Published: 21 July 2025

Abstract

Background: The central variant of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (cvPRES) is an atypical subtype of PRES. Although no unifying definitions exists, it is most often characterized by vasogenic edema involving “central” structures, such as the brainstem, subcortical nuclei, and spinal cord, with relative sparing of the parieto-occipital lobes. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the PRISMA guidelines and was pre-registered on PROSPERO [CRD42023483806]. Both the Joanna Briggs Institute and New-Castle Ottawa scale were used for case reports and cohort studies, respectively. The meta-analysis was completed using R-Studio and its associated “metafor” package. Results: A comprehensive search in four databases yielded 70 case reports/series (n = 100) and 12 cohort studies. The meta-analysis revealed a pooled incidence rate of 13% (95% CI: 9–18%) for cvPRES amongst included cohort studies on PRES. Significant heterogeneity was observed (I2 = 71% and a τ 2 = 0.2046). The average age of affected individuals was 40.9 years, with a slightly higher prevalence in males (54%). The most common etiological factor was hypertension (72%). Fifty percent had an SBP >200 mmHg at presentation and a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 217.6 ± 40.82. Imaging revealed an increased T2 signal involving the brain stem (88%), most often in the pons (62/88; 70.45%), and 18/100 (18%) cases of PRES with spinal cord involvement (PRES-SCI). Management primarily involved blood pressure reduction, with adjunctive therapies for underlying causes such as anti-seizure medications or hemodialysis. The MAP between isolated PRES-SCI and cvPRES without spinal cord involvement did not show significant differences (p = 0.5205). Favorable outcomes were observed in most cases, with a mortality rate of only 2%. Conclusions: cvPRES is most often associated with higher blood pressure compared to prior studies with typical PRES. The pons is most often involved. Despite the severity of blood pressure and critical brain stem involvement, those with cvPRES have favorable functional outcomes and a lower mortality rate than typical PRES, likely attributable to reversible vasogenic edema without significant neuronal dysfunction.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) is a neurological disorder characterized by a variety of symptoms, including headaches, altered mental status, seizures, and visual disturbances. It is most identified through characteristic radiological findings, predominantly involving the posterior regions of the cerebral cortex and subcortical white matter [1]. Although the exact pathophysiology of PRES remains incompletely understood, it is thought to be related to endothelial dysfunction, leading to vasogenic edema. In recent years, a variant of this condition, known as central-variant PRES (cvPRES), has been increasingly recognized. Unlike the classical form of PRES, which predominantly affects the posterior regions of the brain, central-variant PRES is characterized by the involvement of central brain structures, including the basal ganglia, thalamus, brainstem, and/or spinal cord. This variation presents unique diagnostic challenges and may have different clinical implications compared to the typical form of PRES [2]. However, no unified consensus on the definition of cvPRES has been established.
cvPRES raises several critical questions about its epidemiology, clinical presentation, risk factors, pathophysiology, and outcomes. While there is growing literature on this subject, there has been no comprehensive synthesis of the evidence to date. Misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis can lead to inappropriate management, potentially resulting in adverse outcomes. Understanding the distinct features of central-variant PRES, including its triggers, clinical course, and response to treatment, is crucial for optimizing patient care. Additionally, the location of vasogenic edema within the posterior fossa and brainstem brings forth the concern for life-threatening herniation syndromes, which may require decompressive craniectomy and other neurosurgical interventions.
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to provide a detailed analysis of the characteristics of cvPRES, comparing them with the classical form of the syndrome where relevant. We will evaluate aspects such as demographics, clinical manifestations, precipitating factors, imaging findings, medical and surgical management strategies, purported pathophysiological mechanisms, and outcomes. By doing so, we seek to offer a comprehensive overview of this condition, contributing to better recognition, diagnosis, and management of patients with central-variant PRES.

2. Methods

This study was exempt from an institutional review board, as it involves analysis of de-identified data that have already been collected. Therefore, it will not be possible to trace the data presented back to individual patients.

2.1. Search Strategy

A PRISMA directed systematic review and meta-analysis were planned and prospectively registered on PROSPERO [CRD42023483806] and Open Science Framework (OSF) [3]. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across four electronic databases, including PubMed/PubMed Central/MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Hinari. The search strategy was designed to include a combination of keywords and MeSH terms related to “Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome,” “PRES,” “central variant,” “brainstem variant,” and related terminologies. The complete search string and terminologies for each database are included in Table 1. The search was restricted to studies published in English from the inception of the database. Reference lists of identified articles were manually searched to ensure the inclusion of additional relevant studies. Both backwards and forward citation tracking was utilized, and a gray literature search was completed by reviewing the first 100 results on Google Scholar and Open Gray.

2.2. Eligibility Criteria

Studies were included if they met the following criteria: (1) patients diagnosed with central-variant PRES, as defined by imaging criteria, which include increased T2-weighted signal involving central structures (e.g., basal ganglia, thalamus, brainstem, cerebellum, and spinal cord) in the absence of significant cortical involvement; (2) articles reporting on clinical features, imaging findings, management, and outcomes; and (3) study designs including randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, and case reports/series. All cases were reviewed by board-eligible or certified adult neurologists. Articles only of the English language were included. Reviews, editorials, commentaries, and studies with insufficient data on central-variant PRES were excluded. Records published in non-peer reviewed journals were not included in the analysis.

2.3. Data Extraction

First, the aggregate records from the initial search were exported to EndNote 21, and duplicate records were removed. Next, two reviewers (B.S.S. & M.A.G-D.) independently extracted data using the Rayyan QCRI web platform. Extracted information included study characteristics (author, year of publication, study design), patient demographics (age, gender), clinical presentations, imaging findings, management strategies, and outcomes. Discrepancies between reviewers were resolved through discussion or by consulting a third reviewer (B.S.).

2.4. Quality and Risk of Bias Assessment

The quality and risk of bias assessment was assessed using appropriate tools: the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) assessment tool for case reports/series and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for observational studies. The JBI tool consists of eight items addressing different aspects of the methodological quality of case reports, including precise patient demographics, accurate diagnosis, objective measurements of intervention outcomes, and follow-up information. The quality and risk of bias assessment were conducted by two authors (B.S.S., M.A.G-D.); a third author was consulted (B.S.) for any discrepancy between reviewers.

2.5. Statistical Analysis and Meta Analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the extracted data. Data were presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD) and as frequencies and percentages for categorical variables. In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the incidence rate of cvPRES from cohort studies. The Shapiro–Wilk test was used to assess for normality. An unpaired t-test was used when comparing MAPs between cvPRES without spinal cord involvement (SCI) and PRES-SCI. The meta-analysis was conducted using R-Studio, employing the “metafor” package to pool the incidence rate across studies. We assessed heterogeneity among studies using the I2 statistic. To visualize the results, we generated forest plots to display the individual and pooled incidence rate with corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Funnel plots were used to assess publication bias, and Baujat plots were constructed to identify studies that contributed significantly to heterogeneity.

2.6. Data Validation

Although the data presented here and their corresponding analysis is declassified, the data sheet and document will be stored on a secure password-protected hard drive indefinitely. The ethical standards outlined by the Declaration of Helsinki will be upheld. No attempt will be made to identify individual patients.

3. Results

3.1. Search Results

A total of 1120 records were obtained. After removing duplicates, 912 records had their abstracts and titles screened. A total of 191 records were reviewed and assessed for eligibility for inclusion in the qualitative and quantitative synthesis. A PRISMA-guided flow diagram of record assessment is provided in Figure 1. Single case records and case series are presented in Table 2 [4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90]. Cohort studies are included in Table 3 [7,18,21,26,62,91,92,93,94,95].

3.2. Clinical and Radiographic Characteristics

A total of 70 records with 100 patients are included in the single-case analysis. A total of 12 cohort studies are included. The average age of reported cases was 40.9. Fifty-four of one hundred cases occurred in men and 46/100 in women. Fourteen cases were reported in patients < 18 years of age. The most reported medical history include hypertension (40/100; 40% of cases), chronic kidney disease/end stage renal disease (ESRD) (13/100; 13%), acute kidney injury (4/100; 4%), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (2/100), systemic lupus erythematosus (6/100; 6%), and other immunological conditions, including Sjogren disease, polyarteritis nodosa, and thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (4/100; 4%). One case of T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) (1), neurofibromatosis type-1 (NF-1), and testicular carcinoma on bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin were observed.
The systolic blood pressure (SBP) on arrival ranged from 120 to 270 mmHg (median: 200). Fifty out of one hundred cases had an SBP >200 mmHg. The mean SBP was 202 ± 37.58 mmHg (range: 120–270), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) 124 mmHg ± 27.35 mmHg (range: 40–220), pulse pressure (PP) 77.7 ± 22.89 (range: 36–142), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) 217.6 ± 40.82 (range: 85.3–326.66). Nineteen cases had seizures, 42/100 had headaches, and 21/100 had visual disturbance, with alteration in mental status in 14/100, three with aphasia, and one with Anton-Babinski syndrome, and 6/100 had decreased level of consciousness. Neurological symptoms localizing to the posterior circulation (e.g., dysarthria, dysphagia, dysmetria, nausea, vomiting, nystagmus, vertigo, lower cranial nerve palsy, obtundation/comatose, etc.) were seen in 30% of cases.
MRI findings included T2/FLAIR hyperintensities or vasogenic edema involving the brainstem in 88/100 cases: (62/88 pons, 21/88 midbrain, 22/88 medulla). Additionally, vasogenic edema was observed in other areas, including 38/100 cerebellum/cerebellar peduncle, 21/100 basal ganglia, 15/100 thalamus, and 18/100 cases involving the spinal cord (18/18 cervical cord lesion, 5/18 thoracic cord lesion). Eighteen percent of cases reported diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) hyperintensities with corresponding apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) mapping hypointensities. Four reported susceptibility weighted imaging (SWI) hypointensities involving the bilateral thalami (1), basal ganglia (2) and pons (1), and cerebral white matter (1). These SWI findings are suggestive of chronic microbleeds due to hypertension. Shimizu et al. reported a case of pediatric T-ALL with significant vasogenic edema, diffusion restriction, and contrast enhancement within the cerebellum [68]. Yamagami et al. reported a case of central-variant PRES with associated hemorrhagic transformation involving the basal ganglia and thalamus [78]. Zhang et al. presented a case of brainstem PRES involving the pons with hemorrhagic conversion [80]. de Havenon et al. presented two cases of spinal cord PRES, which showed a central confluent lesion involving the entire spinal cord [81]. Agarwal et al. reported a pediatric case of PRES-SCI with leptomeningeal enhancement [88].
Cerebrospinal fluid analysis when completed was often normal; six cases reported elevated protein. Kachi et al. reported a case of central PRES secondary to Sjogren disease, which showed elevated SSA/B antibodies as well as elevated oligoclonal bands in CSF [41]. Decker et al. completed a cerebellar biopsy on a patient with hypertension-related central PRES and found fibrinoid change and perivascular infiltrates of mature lymphocytes [27]. The case by Yis et al. demonstrated an elevated IgG index of 0.9 (normal: <0.7) [96].
Medical management most often included blood pressure reduction and seizure management. Thirteen cases required renal-replacement therapy (RRT), one case required VA-ECMO after a cardiac arrest, one individual required plasma exchange for thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, and four patients were treated with intravenous methylprednisolone, often with an underlying autoimmune condition (i.e., SLE and Sjogren disease). Three cases required emergent external ventricular drain (EVD) placement, two individuals required suboccipital decompressive craniectomy, and there was one case of high cervical (C1) laminectomy. One patient was treated with erythropoietin, ferrous sulfate, and bicarbonate for metabolic acidosis from obstructive nephropathy leading to uremia [40]. The patient described by Vaysman et al. who was hypertensive and had SLE was treated with plasmapheresis [75]. The case by Shimizu et al. showed significant hypertension in a 10-year-old girl (>99th percentile) on a chemotherapy regimen for T-ALL including four doses of intravenous vincristine (1.5 mg/m2 ) and daunorubicin (30 mg/m2) given every week, eight doses of intramuscular L-asparaginase (5000 units/m2) administered every third day, daily oral dexamethasone (10 mg/m2/day for three weeks and subsequent taper), and a single dose of intrathecal cytarabine (30 mg), methotrexate (12 mg), and prednisolone (10 mg) administered on day five of treatment [68]. Yokoyama et al. reported a case of central-variant PRES secondary to blood pressure fluctuations from Guillain Barre syndrome (GBS) treated with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) [79].
The most common purported causes were hypertension (72/100; 72%), eclampsia (2), renal failure/kidney disease (4), SLE (4), Sjogren disease (1) hypomagnesemia (1), immunotherapy (1), sulfasalazine (1), and GBS (1). The case by Chaudhari et al. reported central PRES in a one-week postpartum woman with no clear etiology [23]. The case by Sharma et al. reported a 7-year-old boy with grade IV vesicoureteral reflex with hypertension [67]. Chan et al. reported the case of a 4-year-old boy with hypertension from NF-1-related renal artery stenosis with prominent vasogenic edema involving the pons, medulla, cerebellar hemispheres, and complete spinal cord (cervical > thoracic) [87]. Marrone et al. reported a case of central-variant PRES due to hypertension secondary to renal-artery stenosis from paraaortic lymph node dissection [86]. The pediatric PRES-SCI case by Agarwal et al. occurred because of hypertension secondary to renal artery stenosis [88]. The PRES-SCI case presented by Choh et al. occurred due to hypertension from IgA nephropathy [89]. Srichawla et al. reported a case of cvPRES due to rapidly fluctuating blood pressure presumedly from adrenal insufficiency [95]. Most cases showed clinical and radiographic improvement in 1–2 months from the initial diagnosis. We report a mortality rate of 2%; all cases succumbed to the illness and died within the same hospitalization.

3.3. Retrospective Studies

Ahn et al. (2004) completed a single-center retrospective analysis of PRES and reported a prevalence of 4/37, 10.8% of the central-variant of PRES. Bansal et al. (2020) described 22 cases of PRES, wherein 40% had radiographic involvement of the cerebellum, 15% of the basal ganglia, 10% of the deep white matter, and 10% of the brainstem [7,18]. Brewer et al. (2013) performed a 10-year retrospective analysis on the neuroimaging findings of 47 women who had eclampsia. Eleven individuals (23%) were reported to involve the basal ganglia and cerebellum, five of whom were antepartum, and six were postpartum [97]. Chen et al. (2017) performed a retrospective analysis and found 11 individuals with the central variant of PRES (seven male and four female), with a median age of 60.0 (range 40.0–63.5). The reported etiology was hypertension in all eleven cases [91]. Chou et al. (2004) performed a retrospective analysis of 12 patients with clinical radiographic findings consistent with PRES [26]. Of the reported cases, 1/12 had radiographic findings consistent with the central variant (case 25). Fitzgerald et al. (2015) completed a retrospective review from 2007–2012 and identified 6/80 (7.5%) cases of central-variant PRES [92]. They determined a higher prevalence of extreme hypertension and renal dysfunction compared to the non-central variant [92]. Li et al. (2012) completed a retrospective study of 59 cases of PRES and reported the central variant occurring in five patients (brainstem n = 2; basal ganglia n = 3) [98]. McKinney et al. (2013) completed a retrospective review of 124 cases of PRES and determined 5/124 (4%) to have the central variant [2]. McKinney et al. (2007) completed another retrospective study of 76 PRES cases and determined that 30.3% involved the thalamus and 34.2% the cerebellum; 18.4% were within the brainstem, and 11.8% involved the basal ganglia [93]. Raman et al. (2017) completed a retrospective review of 92 patients with PRES and identified a total of 22 individuals with predominant brainstem and cerebellar involvement [99]. Yoon et al. completed a retrospective analysis of 16 PRES patients and found atypical radiographic findings including four episodes within the basal ganglia, three in the brainstem, two in the cerebellum, and three in the thalamus [100]. Aygunes et al. completed a retrospective review of 101 pediatric patients with PRES who underwent hematopoietic stem cell transplant [94]. They found a 15.8% (16/101) incidence of the central variant. They also noted a higher mortality rate (n = 10, 62.5%) compared to those with the typical variant (n = 5, 5.9%) [94].

3.4. PRES-SCI

A direct unpaired two-tailed t-test was performed to compare the mean arterial pressure (MAP) between isolated PRES with spinal cord involvement (PRES-SCI) and central-variant PRES without spinal cord involvement. Prior to the t-test, normality of the data was confirmed using the Shapiro–Wilk test, yielding W = 0.9329 and p = 0.2433, which passed the normality threshold with an α = 0.05. The unpaired t-test revealed no statistically significant difference in MAP between the two groups (t = 0.6453, p = 0.5205), suggesting that MAP levels are comparable in these presentations of PRES with spinal cord involvement. However, this may be limited by the smaller sample size in the PRES-SCI group (18 vs. 85).

3.5. Meta-Analysis of Incidence Rate

The meta-analysis calculated the pooled incidence rate of the observed events (cvPRES) across the included studies. A total of eight studies that provided enough information on the incidence of the central variant of PRES was included in the quantitative synthesis. Using a random-effects model, the pooled incidence rate was estimated at 13% (CI: 9–18%) (Figure 2). Heterogeneity among studies was substantial, with an I2 = 71% and a τ2 = 0.2046. The heterogeneity was statistically significant (p < 0.01), indicating considerable variation in effect sizes across studies. To assess potential publication bias, a funnel plot was generated, and a Baujat plot was used to identify influential studies contributing to heterogeneity (Figure 3 and Figure 4).

3.6. Quality and Risk of Bias Assessment of Case Reports/Series

The methodological quality and risk of bias for the included studies were assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tool. Of the studies evaluated, the majority (n = 79) achieved a perfect score (8/8), indicating high methodological rigor and a low risk of bias. These studies consistently satisfied all eight appraisal criteria, demonstrating robustness in study design and reporting. Three studies received scores of 6/8 or 5/8, reflecting a moderate risk of bias due to unmet criteria in areas such as follow-up completeness or consideration of confounding factors. These studies include Arai et al. (1997), Braatz et al. (2014), and Matsumoto et al. (2014) [10,21,51]. Two studies (Doi et al., Resorlu et al.) scored 4/8, corresponding to a high risk of bias and potential limitations in methodological quality (Table 3) [63,101]. Overall, the quality assessment demonstrates that the included studies are predominantly of high methodological quality, with a small subset requiring caution in interpretation due to moderate to high risks of bias.

3.7. Quality and Risk of Bias Assessment of Cohort Studies

The quality of included cohort studies was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS), which evaluates selection (maximum 4 points), comparability (maximum 2 points), and outcomes (maximum 3 points). A total score of 9 indicates the highest quality. Many of the studies (n = 10) achieved scores of 8 or 9, indicating robust methodological quality. Notably, Chen et al. (2017) scored the maximum 9 points, meeting all criteria across selection, comparability, and outcomes [91]. Other studies, including Ahn et al. (2004), Brewer et al., and Chou et al. (2004), consistently scored 8, reflecting strong performance in most domains [7,26,97]. One study, Bansal et al. (2020), scored 4 points [18]. While it demonstrated adequacy in selection (3 points) and outcome (1 point), it lacked comparability between cohorts, which significantly impacted its total score (Table 4).

4. Discussion

The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis provide a comprehensive understanding of the clinical, radiographic, and management characteristics of cvPRES, a rare but significant subtype of PRES. With an overall pooled incidence rate of 13% (95% CI: 9–18%) across cohort studies, our results underscore the clinical importance of recognizing this variant in settings where its presentation may deviate from the typical posterior-predominant PRES. In a study by Fugate et al., the mean peak systolic blood pressure among PRES patients was 199 mm Hg (range: 160–268 mm Hg), and the mean peak diastolic blood pressure was 109 mm Hg (range: 60–144 mm Hg) [102]. Another study by Rabinstein et al. reported that approximately 75% of PRES patients presented with hypertension, indicating that while elevated blood pressure is common, it is not a universal finding in PRES cases [103]. They reported a mean SBP of 182 ± 20 mm Hg and MAP 124 ± 15 [103]. In our cohort of 100 patients with cvPRES, we reported a higher mean SBP and MAP at 202 ± 37.58 mmHg and 217.6 ± 40.82, respectively.
The higher blood pressure observed in cvPRES compared to typical PRES may suggest a distinct pathophysiological mechanism potentially driven by differential vascular autoregulatory thresholds in central brain structures. Unlike the posterior cortex, which has relatively low autoregulatory capacity and is prone to vasogenic edema at moderate elevations in blood pressure, the brainstem, basal ganglia, and thalamus may require more extreme hypertension to surpass their autoregulatory limits [104]. This could explain the selective involvement of these regions in central-variant PRES. Furthermore, the proximity of these structures to deep perforating arteries with limited collateral flow may exacerbate vulnerability under conditions of severe hypertension, leading to more profound endothelial dysfunction, breakdown of the blood-brain barrier, and vasogenic edema [105]. Excessive adrenergic stimulation may amplify vascular permeability and inflammatory responses in central brain regions. Additionally, the co-occurrence of microvascular compromise or pre-existing structural abnormalities, such as chronic hypertension-induced arteriolosclerosis, could heighten susceptibility to central-variant manifestations. However, these hypotheses need to be supported by original studies.
In our dataset, the pons was predominantly affected, which may be attributed to several pathophysiological mechanisms underlying reversible pontine edema. The pons, a critical structure within the brainstem, is particularly susceptible to fluctuations in blood pressure due to its unique vascular supply and limited sympathetic innervation [106]. Acute hypertension can overwhelm the autoregulatory capacity of the pontine vasculature, leading to endothelial dysfunction and increased permeability of the blood-brain barrier [107]. Furthermore, the anatomical configuration of the pons, with its dense arrangement of neural tracts and nuclei, may predispose it to the accumulation of interstitial fluid during episodes of increased vascular permeability [52]. The resultant edema can disrupt neural conduction, leading to the clinical manifestations observed in patients with pontine involvement. Most notably, patients with cvPRES rarely reported diffusion restriction or cytotoxic edema within the pons. Thus, the impaired autoregulation does not lead to irreversible neuronal injury and permanent neurological deficits, which may be seen in a pontine stroke or central pontine myelinolysis [108].
Table 2. Single-patient records included in the systematic review and meta-analysis.
Table 2. Single-patient records included in the systematic review and meta-analysis.
Case No.AuthorPublication TypeYearAgeGenderRisk FactorsBlood PressureClinical SequelaeCT FindingsMRI FindingsVessel ImagingCSF ExaminationTreatmentPurported CauseOutcomes
1Abe et al. [4]Case Report201459MHTN, ESRD181/81 mmHgHeadache, nausea, dysarthria, tic, and weakness involving the bilateral arms and legsHypodense lesion involving pons and cerebellumT2/FLAIR hyperintense lesion involving the pons and cerebellumNANormalBlood Pressure management and RRT (HD)HTNRadiographic and clinical improvement in 13 days
2Abraham et al. [5]Case Report202025FSLE, Lupus nephritis (grade IV)SBP 190 mmHgGTC seizure, direction-changing torsional nystagmus, horizontal ophthalmoplegia, and
symmetric weakness
T2/FLAIR hyperintense and ADC hypointense lesion involving bilateral paramedian thalamic and
pontine hyperintensity. SWI punctate hypointensity within the
areas of restricted diffusion in the bilateral thalami and
pons, compatible with microhemorrhages
MRA: Subtle short
segment stenoses involving bilateral external carotid
arteries, the right V4 segment, and the right P2 segment.
NormalBlood pressure management and RRTHTNClinical improvement at 3 months. SWI imaging showed persistent punctate microhemorrhages in the bilateral thalami and pons.
3Abusabha et al. [6]Case Report201752MHTNSBP 260 mmHgHeadaches, vertigo, blurred visionNAT2/FLAIR and DWI hyperintensities involving the bilateral cerebellum, pons, and occipital lobe NANAEVD insertion and suboccipital craniectomy and C1 HTNRadiographic and clinical improvement in 3 weeks
4Ahn et al. [7]Retrospective Study200429FNA155/100 mmHgGeneralized tonic clonic seizuresNAT2/FLAIR hyperintensities and ADC hypointensities involving bilateral basal ganglia NANABlood pressure managementPostpartum eclampsiaRadiographic and clinical resolution
5Ahn et al. [7]Retrospective Study200428FNA180/120 mmHgGeneralized tonic clonic seizuresNAT2/FLAIR hyperintensities and ADC hypointensities involving bilateral basal ganglia and thalami NANABlood pressure management
EclampsiaRadiographic and clinical resolution
6Ahn et al. [7]Retrospective Study200441MHTN, CKD (diabetic nephropathy)240/140 mmHgAlteration in mental statusNAT2/FLAIR hyperintensities and ADC hypointensities involving bilateral ponsNANABlood pressure managementHTNRadiographic and clinical resolution
7Ahn et al. [7]Retrospective Study200432FHTN, CKD190/100 mmHgAlteration in mental statusNAT2/FLAIR hyperintensities and ADC hypointensities involving bilateral ponsNANABlood pressure managementHTNRadiographic and clinical resolution
8Akhondian et al. [8]Case Report20224FSecondary hyperaldosteronism, HTN.180/110 mmHgAlteration in mental status and status epilepticus NAT2/FLAIR and DWI hyperintensities in splenium of the corpus callosum, in cerebellum, brainstem, and cervical spinal cordNANASeizure management (phenytoin, and phenobarbital). Blood pressure management (hydralazine, furosemide, and captopril).HTN from secondary hyperaldosteronismRadiographic and clinical resolution within one month
9Andour et al. [9]Case Series202359FDiabetes, HTN170/100 mmHgAlteration in mental statusNormalT2/FLAIR, DWI hyperintense and ADC hypointense lesions involving temporal and occipital regions, in
corpus callosum, in the brainstem and cerebellum
NANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical resolution of symptoms
10Andour et al. [9]Case Series202334MKidney failureNAGTC seizureNAT2/FLAIR hyperintensity left putamen with gadolinium enhancement NANAHDRenal failureClinical and radiographic resolution of symptoms
11Arai et al. [10]Case Report199757MCKD, polyarteritis nodosa200/140 mmHgGTC seizuresParietal lobe hypodensityT2/FLAIR hyperintensities emporo-occipital white matter, the thalamus, the posterior limbs of the internal capsules, the external capsules, the midbrain, the pons, and the middle cerebellar pedunclesNANABlood pressure managementHTN NA
12Aridon et al. [11]Case Report201153MThrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura260/180 mmHgDisturbances of gait, dizziness, urinary incontinence and
lethargy
Enlargement of the
lateral and third ventricles
T2/FLAIR hyperintensities involving white matter of cerebral and cerebellar hemispheres
with the involvement of midbrain and cerebellar peduncles
NAElevated protein (77 mg/dL)Blood pressure management (nitroprusside, furosemide, and
clonidine) and plasma exchange
HTNClinical and radiographic resolution of symptoms at 3 months
13Bag et al. [14]Case Report201023FSLENormalAlteration in mental status. Being treated for SLE with IV methylprednisolone 40 mg every 8 h. T2/FLAIR and DWI hyperintensities involving bilateral thalamic and cerebral peduncleNANAMethylprednisolone 500 mg daily and cyclophosphamide. SLEClinical and radiographic resolution of symptoms at 8 months
14Bălaşa et al. [15]Case Report201542MNone190/110 mmHgOccipital headache, nausea, vomiting
and disequilibrium. Elevated creatinine 9.88 mg/dL on arrival.
Multiple
white matter hypodensities in both cerebellar hemispheres
and the brainstem
T2/FLAIR hyperintensities involving the cerebellar white
matter as well as in the pons and midbrain
NANAHemodialysis and blood pressure managementHTN (due to kidney disease)Clinical and radiographic resolution of symptoms at 2 weeks
15Ball et al. [16]Case Report202353MAlcohol abuseNA3 days of slurred speech, headache, and dizziness T2/FLAIR hyperintensities involving the bilateral cerebellumNormalNAMagnesium infusion Hypomagnesemia (<0.5 mg/dL)Clinical and radiographic resolution of symptoms (unspecified follow-up time)
16Bandeo et al. [17]Case Report201826FUlcerative colitis Adalimumab (40 mg every other week)NAThunderclap headache with photophobia, nausea, and vomiting.NALeft frontal cSAH and hyperintense lesions on T2-weighted and FLAIR sequences located in both occipital lobes, left cerebellar hemisphere, and brainstemDSA: NormalNADiscontinuation of adalimumabAdalimumabClinical and radiographic resolution of symptoms at 2 months
17Bansal et al. [18] Retrospective Study202016FViral hepatitis, and acute kidney injuryNAAlteration in mental status, seizures, vomitingNAT2/FLAIR hyperintensities including basal ganglia, deep white mater and temporal lobeNANABlood pressure managementHTNNA
18Barnaure et al. [19]Case Report201457MHTNElevated (unspecified)Gait ataxiaNAT2/FLAIR hyperintensities involving e pons, medulla,
and cerebellum, and a small zone of contrast enhancement
in the pons
NANormal Blood pressure managementHTNClinical and radiographic resolution of symptoms at 1 week
19Bing et al. [20]Case Report201953MNone220/120 mmHgAcute onset aphasia, feverNAT2/FLAIR hyperintensities involving the pons, medulla, and cervical spinal cord NANABlood pressure management (nicardipine and urapidil)HTNClinical and radiographic resolution of symptoms in one month
20Braatz et al. [21]Case Report201439MNA230/140 mmHgHeadache, nausea, blurriness, and cortical blindnessNAT2/FLAIR and DWI hyperintensities involving the pons and medulla NANABlood pressure managementHTNNA
21Chakroun-Walha et al. [22]Case Report201614MRenal insufficiency 200/150 mmHgHeadaches, ataxia, hemianopsia, bilateral strabismus, GTC seizureHypodensities in the brainstemT2/FLAIR hyperintensities involving the brainstem and partially cerebellumNANABlood pressure management and hemodialysisHTN (Renal etiology)Persistent strabismus and hemianopsia
22Chaudhari et al. [23]Case Report201828FCaesarean section one week prior to presentationNASeizure (abnormal movements of limbs and tongue-biting) T2/FLAIR hyperintensities involving bilateral basal ganglia, and left cerebellumNANormalSeizure management (levetiracetam, and phenytoin)Postpartum?Clinical and radiographic improvement in 8 weeks
23Chen et al. [109] Case Report201455MHTN210/140 mmHgHeadache and dizzinessNAT2/FLAIR hyperintensities in the pons, midbrain bilateral thalami, and cerebellar hemispheres with multiple microbleeds at bilateral
basal ganglia
NANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical and radiographic improvement in 1 month
24Chiang et al. [25] Case Report201947MESRD, missed three dialysis sessions194/114 mmHgComatoseHypodentisities in the brainstemT2/FLAIR hyperintensities involving the pons and cerebellumNANormalRRT and blood pressure managementHTN (missed dialysis sessions)Clinical and radiographic improvement in 2 weeks
25Chou et al. [26]Retrospective Study200452MHTN194/120Seizure, aphasiaNAT2/FLAIR hyperintensities involving deep white matter, thalamus, and ponsNANABlood pressure management, anticonvulsants, and RRT. HTNClinical and radiographic improvement in 4 months
26Decker et al. [27]Case Report200974MHTN224/144 mmHgSlurred speech, right-sided facial droop,
and incontinence of urine
NAT2/FLAIR hyperintensities involving the brainstem (pons and midbrain)NANormal (opening pressure of 16 cm of water, a protein of 129 mg/dL, WBC count
of 1/mm3
, and glucose of 65 mg/dL (serum glucose 137 mg/dL).
Blood pressure managementHTNClinical and radiographic improvement in 3 months
27Deguchi et al. [28]Case Report201242FHTN, CKD, thrombocytopenia270/150 mmHgHeadache, nauseaNAT2/FLAIR hyperintensities involving the brainstem and cerebellumNANABlood pressure management (amlodipine, nifedipine, arotinolol)HTN Clinical and radiographic improvement in 1 month
28Dhawan et al. [29]Case Report201010FPheochromocytoma
260/190 mmHgFacial palsy and bilateral
papilledema
NAT2/FLAIR hyperintensities in the bilateral caudate, putamen, thalamus, left-sided posterior limb of internal capsule, midbrain NANA Blood pressure management HTN (pheochromocytoma)Clinical and radiographic improvement in 2 years
29Di Stefano et al. [30]Case Report201946MMononucleosis, GERD200/140 mmHgOne-month history of headache and blurry vision in the right eyeNAT2/FLAIR hyperintensities involving brainstem (midbrain, pons, medulla) and cervical spinal cord (C5–C6) NormalNABlood pressure management (ramipril, doxazosin)HTNClinical and radiographic improvement in 3 weeks
30Doi et al. [101]Case Report202073MMetastatic colorectal cancerNAAcute onset visual disturbanceNAIncreased T2-weighted signal within the pons, cerebellum, and bilateral optic nerves. Diffusion restriction within the pons and cerebellumNANANANANA
31Doi et al. [31]Case Report200635MNone180/118 mmHgHeadache, nausea, blurred visionNAIncreased T2-weighted signal in the pons, cerebellum, and basal gangliaNANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical and radiographic improvement in 1 month
32Doi et al. [31]Case Report200652FHTN200/130 mmHgAltered mental statusNAIncreased T2-weighted signal in the midbrain, basal ganglia, and cerebellumNANABlood pressure managementHTNRadiographic improvement in 2 weeks
33Fujii et al. [32]Case Report202357MNone173/134 mmHgRigidityNAIncreased signal on T2WI within the bilateral cerebellum, optic tract, cerebellar vermis, and cervical spinal cord. With DWI and ADC correlate in most lesionsNANARRT and blood pressure managementHTNRadiographic improvement in five weeks
34Gowan et al. [33]Case Report201947FHTN, T2DM, ESRD180/99 mmHg1-week history of altered mental status, difficulties walking, fatigue, and syncopeNormalIncreased signal on T2WI involving the pons and cerebellumNANARRT and blood pressure managementHTNRadiographic improvement on day 9
35Grossbach et al. [34]Case Report201465FColon cancer217/113 mmHgComatose Increased signal on T2WI involving the bilateral cerebellumNACSF: NormalMechanical ventilation, sub-occipital craniectomy, EVD placement, HTNModified Rankin score (mRS) 0 in six months
36Hama et al. [35]Case Report201949FCKD242/144 mmHg2-week history of vomiting and malaiseNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the pons and medullaNANARRT and blood pressure managementHTN and kidney diseaseClinical and radiographic improvement in 3 weeks
37Han et al. [36]Case Report201946MHTN147/103 mmHgAcute onset dysarthria and mild dysphagiaNAIncreased signal on T2WI brainstem, cerebellum and corticospinal
Tracts. Diffusion restriction involving pons. Microhemorrhages seen on SWI within pons
NACSF: Elevated protein 55 mg/dLConservative managementAcute kidney injuryClinical and radiographic improvement within 4 weeks
38Hayashi et al. [37]Case Report202271MNA209/124 mmHgDecreased level of consciousnessNAIncreased signal on T2WI within the pons NANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical improvement and discharge on day 20
39Hebant et al. [38]Case Report201980FHTN, HLD190/110 mmHgAcute alteration in mental statusNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the medulla and right cerebellar peduncleNACSF: Elevated protein. Blood pressure managementHTNClinical and radiographic improvement within a few days
40Ho et al. [12]Case Report201649MNA202/138 mmHgVertigo, cognitive decline, and difficulty ambulatingHypodensity involving ponsIncreased signal on T2WI involving the ponsNANABlood pressure managementHTNRadiographic resolution in 10 days, clinical improvement in
41Honda et al. [13]Case Report201946FNA208/140 mmHgVisual impairmentNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the pons and bilateral cerebellar hemispheresNANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical and radiographic resolution
42Jesrani et al. [39]Case Report202139FNA118/74 mmHgGTC seizuresNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the right caudate nucleus, bilateral thalami, and left globus pallidusNANAAnti-seizure medicationsSLEDeath on day 4
43Jia et al. [40]Case Report201714FNeurogenic bladder120/81 mmHgDecreased level of consciousness (comatose)NAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the midbrain and ponsNANAErythropoietin, ferrous sulfate, bicarbonateRenal failure (obstructive nephropathy)Discharged on day 14 at baseline and radiographic resolution at 2 months
44Kachi et al. [41]Case Report202371FHTN, Sjogren’s disease197/108 mmHgUnsteadiness and weakness of the left lower extremityNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the basal ganglia,
thalamus, brainstem, cerebellum
NACSF: Elevated protein, oligoclonal bands anti-SSA/SSB, IL-6IVMP 1000 mg for 3 days. Followed by oral prednisone 1 mg/kg. Sjogren diseaseSignificant improvement on discharge
45Katano et al. [42] Case Report201054MNA201/113 mmHgDysarthria and altered mental statusNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the pons with ADC correlateNANAAntihypertensive therapy with hemodialysisHTNContinued renal dysfunction, unspecified neurological outcome
46Kitaguchi et al. [43]Case Series200573MCKD, Wernicke encephalopathy220/116 mmHgAppetite loss and failure to thriveNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the pons, thalamus, and cerebellumNANAAntihypertensive therapyHTNMild lateral gaze palsy at 16-month follow-up
47Kitaguchi et al. [43]Case Series200549FAortic valve replacement88/40 mmHgGTC seizure, flu-like symptomsCT scan showed a lacunar infarction in the left internal capsule of the brainIncreased signal on T2WI involving the ponsNACSF: NormalSupportive treatmentUndefinedClinical and radiographic improvement in 2 months. Residual lacunar infarction within pons
48Lamotte et al. [44]Case Report202151MNasopharyngeal carcinoma185/125 mmHgDysarthria and gait instabilityNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the bilateral cerebellum, pons, and temporal lobesNANAHemodialysisAcute renal failureResolution of neurological symptoms in 3 days
49Lee et al. [45]Case Report201747FNA270/220 mmHgAMSNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the ponsNACSF: Opening pressure 21 cm H2O. Protein 102 mg/dL, albumin 64 mg/dL.Blood pressure managementHTNResolution of neurological symptoms in 3 days and radiographic resolution on 9th day
50Liu et al. [46]Case Report201837FHTN240/140 mmHgHeadache and blurry visionNAIncreased signal on T2WI with diffusion restriction involving the midbrainNormalNABlood pressure managementHTNClinical and radiographic resolution in 2 weeks
51Maciel et al. [47]Case Report201544FNA150/110 mmHgSubacute onset headache and visual disturbanceNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the midbrain, pons, medulla, and cerebellar hemispheresNANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical resolution in 2 weeks
52Maier et al. [49] Case Report201822FSLENormal GTC seizuresSymmetrical hypodense lesions within the basal gangliaIncreased signal on T2WI involving the bilateral basal gangliaNANAAnti-seizure medications and osmolar therapySLE associated Immunosuppressive therapy (cyclophosphamide and azathioprine) Death due to septic shock
53Malhotra et al. [48]Case Report201742FSLE, HTN, pulmonary hypertension217/75 mmHgConfusion, dysarthria, R hemiparesis, and hemianesthesiaNormalIncreased signal on T2WI involving the bilateral basal ganglia and thalamusDSA: NormalEEG: NormalBlood pressure managementHTNRadiographic improvement at 5 weeks and discharge to a long-term care facility
54Maruyama et al. [50]Case Report202353MHTN214/145 mmHgHeadache and left-sided weaknessNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the pons and bilateral cerebellar hemispheresNANABlood pressure managementHTNRadiographic improvement in 3 weeks and clinical resolution at 8 weeks
55Matsumoto et al. [51]Case Report202370sFHTN199/111 mmHgGeneralized weaknessNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the pons, cerebellum, and medullaNANABlood pressure managementHTNRadiographic resolution in 10 months
56McCarron et al. [52]Case Report200842MNA195/115 mmHgGTC seizure, right-sided hemiparesisNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the ponsNANABlood pressure managementHTNAlmost complete radiographic resolution at 3-month follow-up
57Moosa et al. [53] Case Report20118FCloacal exstrophy, omphalocele, Chiari malformation with myelomeningocele and syringomyelia, and renal dysplasia with end stage renal disease.180/120 mmHgStatus epilepticusNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the midbrain and ponsNANABlood pressure management and anti-seizure medicationsHTNRadiographic resolution in 9 days
58Nagato et al. [54]Case Report200914FNA185/145 mmHgNausea, vomiting, abdominal painNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the pons, medulla, cerebellum, and cervical spinal cordNANABlood pressure managementHTNSignificant clinical and radiographic improvement over 5 months
59Nanba et al. [55]Case Report201647FNA197/106 mmHgHeadacheNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the pons, bilateral thalamus, bilateral basal ganglia, and periventricular white matterNANABlood pressure managementHTNRadiographic improvement in 2 weeks
60Navarro-Ballester et al. [56]Case Report202162MHTN, HLD190/95 mmHgNausea and vomitingNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the midbrain with SAHDSA: mildly hypoplastic right vertebral arteryNABlood pressure managementHTNModified Rankin score of one at 6-month follow-up
61Ocek et al. [57]Case Report201555FPsoriatic arthritis120/80 mmHgSeizure, headache, hemiparesisNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the basal ganglia and thalamusNACSF: Normal. EEG: Mild background slowingRemoval of toxic agentsulfasalazineRadiographic resolution of symptoms in 1 month
62Ogaki et al. [66]Case Report200949FNA260/170 mmHgSubacute onset worsening blurry visionNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the pons, bilateral cerebellum, and thalami NANABlood pressure managementHTNDischarge in one month with radiographic improvement
63Ohashi et al. [58] Case Report20224-month-oldFNASBP 100–130 mmHgCardiac arrest following immunizationNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the bilateral basal ganglia NANAVA-ECMO, peritoneal dialysisHTNDischarge in 6 months
64Onomura et al. [59]Case Report 202240sFHypertension230/150 mmHgHeadache, fatigue, and nauseaNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the supratentorial white matter, cerebellum, pons, and cerebellar peduncles. Numerous white matter microhemorrhages involving the cerebral white matterNANABlood pressure managementHTNDischarge on day 20 with moderate improvement
65Osman et al. [60]Case Report201332MT1DM, HTN220/140 mmHgGTC seizureNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the bilateral pons and midbrainNACSF: NormalBlood pressure managementHTNRepeat neuroimaging 12 days later showed significant improvement
66Ou et al. [61]Case Report201840MNA200/140 mmHgHeadacheNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the ponsNANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical resolution within three days
67Raya et al. [62]Case Report201929MHIV, ESRD, HTN245/141 mmHgHeadache and burry visionNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the bilateral cerebellar hemisphere with more subtle involvement of the bilateral occipital lobesNANABlood pressure managementHTNDischarged on day 7 of hospitalization with no symptoms
68 Resorlu et al. [63]Case Report201739MHTN170/110 mmHgHeadacheNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the ponsNANABlood pressure managementHTNRadiographic resolution on hospital day 20
69Ribeiro et al. [65] Case Report201359FHIV210/110 mmHgHeadache, nausea, vomiting, blurry visionNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the basal ganglia, thalamus, internal and external capsules, and pons. SWI: microhemorrhages within the ponsNANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical improvement on hospital day 3
70Sallah et al. [64]Case Report202164FESRD, stroke207/110 mmHgLethargy NAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the pons and bilateral middle cerebellar peduncles NAEEG: Findings within the ictal-interictal continuum. Blood pressure management and hemodialysisHTN + ESRDClinical and radiographic resolution on day 11 of hospitalization
71Sharma et al. [67] Case Report20177MNone190/100 mmHgGTC seizureNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the midbrain, pons, medulla, and cervical spinal cordNANABlood pressure management and anti-seizure medicationsHTN + Grade IV vesicoureteral reflex. Radiographic improvement within 3 weeks
72Shimizu et al. [68]Case Report201310FT-ALL141/105 mmHgHeadacheNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the bilateral cerebellum. Gd+ enhancement within the same area. DWI showing patchy diffusion restriction within the bilateral cerebellumNANABlood pressure managementHTN+ chemotherapy (vincristine, danorubicin, dexamethasone, cytarabine, methotrexate, prednisolone)Radiographic improvement within 6 months
73Srinivasan et al. [69]Case Report201771MHTN200/140 mmHgHeadache, dizziness, loss of consciousnessNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the pons with restricted diffusion on DWI NANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical improvement. Repeat imaging not completed.
74Tan et al. [70]Case Report201952MHTN, CKD267/159 mmHgHeadache, dizzinessCTH: Hypoattenuation involving the ponsNANANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical improvement on day 2 of hospitalization
75Tari Capone et al. [71]Case Report201437MHTN270/160 mmHgHeadache, and blurry visionNAIncreased signal on T2WI involving the midbrain and ponsNANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical improvement in 2 weeks and radiographic resolution within 3 months
76Thambisetty et al. [72]Case Series200338MHTN, anemia, thrombocytopenia, chronic hyponatremia, ETOH abuse210/130 mmHgHeadache, right-sided weaknessObstructive
hydrocephalus,
non-enhancing hypoattenuation in
pons, midbrain
Obstructive
hydrocephalus,
increased T2
signal in the
pons and midbrain
NANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical resolution
77Thambisetty et al. [72]Case Series200361MNone219/138 mm.HgLeft-sided weaknessOld lacunar
infarction in
anterior limb
of right internal
capsule, 5-mm
hemorrhagic focus
in right putamen
Increased T2
signal in the
pons, cerebral
peduncles and
basal ganglia
bilaterally
NANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical resolution
78Thambisetty et al. [72]Case Series200346MT2DM, HTN, anemia, stroke203/139 mmHgBlurred vision, confusionHypoattenuation in
the pons, cerebral
peduncles and
internal capsule
bilaterally
Increased T2
signal in midbrain,
pons, medulla and
cerebral peduncles.
Focus of hemorrhage
in left basal ganglia
NANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical resolution
79Tortora et al. [73]Case Report201532FAbortion (1-month ago) 120/70 mmHgHeadache and feverHypoattenuation within the right basal gangliaIncreased T2 signal and diffusion restriction in the pons NANAEnoxaparin and magnesium sulfateUnknownResidual coordination deficits of the extremities, and radiographic findings of pontine ischemia
80Tsutsumi et al. [74]Case Report201254FNone260/142 mmHgDysarthria, right-sided hemiparesisNormalIncreased T2 signal involving the pons. MR spectroscopy showed an elevated choline levelNANABlood pressure managementHTN due to pseudochromocytomaRadiographic resolution on hospital day 18
81Tsutsumi et al. [74]Case Report201244FNone209/130 mmHgHeadache, blurry vision, gait abnormalitiesNAIncreased T2 signal involving the ponsNANABlood pressure managementHTNRadiographic resolution on hospital day 20
82Vaysman et al. [75]Case Report201922FSLE197/121 mmHgHeadache, and joint painNormalIncreased T2 signal involving the midbrainNANABlood pressure management and plasmapheresisHTN + SLEClinical and radiographic resolution of the patients’ symptoms on day 10
83Wakely et al. [76]Case Report200533MNone210/150 mmHgHeadache, and visual disturbanceNormalIncreased T2 signal and diffusion restriction involving the ponsNANABlood pressure managementHTNRadiographic resolution of symptoms within 2 months
84Wittgrove et al. [77] Case Report201857MNone220 mmHgAphasia, altered mental status, right-sided weaknessNormalIncreased T2 signal involving the pons and cerebellar pedunclesNAElevated protein 80 mg/dLBlood pressure managementHTN secondary to renal artery stenosisClinical and radiographic improvement of the patient’s symptoms
85Yamagami et al. [78]Case Report201941FHTN237/142 mmHgHeadacheHemorrhage involving the left thalamus and basal gangliaIncreased T2 signal involving the left cerebellum, pons, temporal lobes, and bilateral basal gangliaDSA: NormalNABlood pressure managementHTNTransferred to an inpatient rehabilitation facility on hospital day 40 with a modified Rankin score of 3. Repeat MRI showing resolution of vasogenic edema
86Yis et al. [96]Case Report20169FNone225/110 mmHgHeadache, vomiting, visual disturbanceNAIncreased T2 signal involving the medulla and cervical spinal cordNACSF: 57 mg/dL, IgG Index 0.9.Blood pressure management and methylprednisoloneHTNClinical improvement in 7 days and radiographic resolution in 10 days
87Yokoyama et al. [79]Case Report201943MGuillain Barre syndrome (GBS)152/88 mmHgDecreased level of consciousnessNAIncrease T2 signal involving the pons, midbrain, cerebellar peduncle, and basal ganglia. Diffusion restrictionNANAIVIG and blood pressure managementHTN secondary to GBSSignificant improvement with residual limb weakness
88Zhang et al. [80]Case Report201635MHTN200/140 mmHgDizzinessHypodensity involving the pons with focal hyperdensity consistent with acute hemorrhagic conversionIncreased T2 signal involving the ponsNACSF: Elevated opening pressure of 245 mm H2OBlood pressure managementHTNClinical and radiographic improvement in one month
89de Havenon et al. [81] Case Report201450MHTN, CKD180/110 mmHgHeadache, vomiting, confusionNAIncreased T2 signal involving the parieto-occipital lobes, bilateral cerebellum, medulla and confluent central lesion involving the entire spinal cordNANABlood pressure managementHTNNear complete radiographic resolution 5 months. Clinically has residual mild lower extremity weakness
90de Havenon et al. [81]Case Report201425MHTN225/160 mmHgHeadache, vision lossNAIncreased T2 signal involving the medulla and central lesions involving the entire spinal cordNANABlood pressure managementHTNComplete clinical and radiographic resolution in 3 months
91Milia et al. [82]Case Report200844FHTN240/140 mmHgHeadache, lower extremity weakness, blurry visionNAIncreased T2 signal involving the pons, medulla, and a central cord lesion from the cervicomedullary junction to C5NACSF: NormalBlood pressure managementHTNClinical and radiographic resolution in 6 months
92Samara et al. [83] Case Report201942MHTN250/130 mmHgHeadache and blurry visionPeriventricular edema, enlarged ventricles, and effacement of the basilar cisternIncreased T2 signal involving the medulla, cerebellum, and upper cervical spinal cord. NACSF: NormalBlood pressure managementHTNClinical and radiographic resolution in 2 months
93Liu et al. [84]Case Report201920MHTN260/140 mmHgBlurry vision and weaknessNAIncreased T2 signal involving the medulla, cervical and thoracic spinal cordNANABlood pressure managementHTNClinical and radiographic resolution in 10 days
94Chan et al. [87]Case Report20184MNF1180/80 mmHgTachycardiaNAIncreased T2 signal involving the pons, medulla, cerebellum, and complete spinal cord (most prominent in cervical cord)NACSF: NormalBlood pressure managementHTN from NF 1-related renal artery stenosisClinical and radiographic improvement in 6 weeks with some residual vasogenic edema within the medulla
95Gocmen et al. [85]Case Report201610MHTN, ESRD170/120 mmHgHeadachesNAIncreased T2 signal involving the medulla and cervical spinal cord (C1-C5)NADeferredBlood pressure managementHTN from ESRDClinical and radiographic resolution in 10 days
96Marrone et al. [86] Case Report201619MTesticular carcinoma (bleomycin, cisplatin and etoposide)240/140 mmHgHeadache, nausea, and central scotoma of the left eyeNAIncreased T2 signal involving the bilateral basal ganglia, pons, medulla, and anterior portion of the entire cervical spinal cordNANABlood pressure managementHTN from renal artery stenosis from paraaortic lymph node dissectionClinical and radiographic resolution in two weeks
97Agarwal et al. [88]Case Report201614MAppendectomy170/110 mmHgSeizure, headache, and blurry visionNAIncreased T2 signal involving the pons, medulla, and entire spinal cord. Contrast sequence showing diffuse leptomeningeal enhancementNACSF: NormalBlood pressure managementHTN from renal artery stenosisClinical and radiographic improvement in 28 days
98Choh et al. [89] Case Report201117MNone240/130 mmHgHeadache, visual disturbance, vomitingNAIncreased T2 signal involving the medulla and cervical spinal cordNANABlood pressure managementHTN from IgA nephropathyClinical and radiographic improvement within one month
99Khokhar et al. [90]Case Report201622MNone200/140 mmHgHeadache, vomiting, blurry visionNAIncreased T2 signal involving the parieto-occipital lobes with predmoninant involvement of the medulla, cerebellar hemisphere, and cervical spinal cordNACSF: Normal. EEG: NormalBlood pressure managementHTNClinical and radiographic improvement in 25 days
100Srichawla et al. [95]Case Report202559FHTN, COPD195 mmHg SBPSeizures, altered mental statusNAIncreased T2 signal involving the bilateral cerebellar hemisphereCTA: NormalCSF: Normal. EEG: Bilateral intermittent rhythmic discharges. Generalized periodic discharges, lateralized rhythmic delta activity in the left frontal lobe. Blood pressure managementHTN due to adrenal insufficiency Clinical and radiographic improvement on day 15
ADC: apparent diffusion coefficient. CKD: chronic kidney disease. COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. cSAH: convexity subarachnoid hemorrhage. DSA: digital subtraction angiography. DWI: diffusion weighted imaging. ESRD: end-stage renal disease. F: female. GBS: Guillain–Barre syndrome. GTC: generalized tonic clonic. HD: hemodialysis. HIV: human immunodeficiency virus. HTN: hypertension. IVIG: intravenous immunoglobulin. M: male. SBP: systolic blood pressure. MRA: magnetic resonance angiography. RRT: renal-replacement therapy. SAH: subarachnoid hemorrhage. SLE: systemic lupus erythematosus. SWI: susceptibility weighted imaging. T-ALL: T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Table 3. Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal and risk of bias results for case reports/series.
Table 3. Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal and risk of bias results for case reports/series.
ReferenceQ1Q2Q3Q4Q5Q6Q7Q8OverallRisk
Abe et al. (2014) [4]YYYYYYYY8Low
Abraham et al. (2020) [5]YYYYYYYY8Low
Abusabha et al. (2017) [6]YYYYYYYY8Low
Akhondian et al. (2002) [8]YYYYYYYY8Low
Andour et al. (2023) [9]YYYYYYYY8Low
Arai et al. (1997) [10]YYYYYNNN5Moderate
Aridon et al. (2011) [11]YYYYYYYY8Low
Bag et al. (2010) [14]YYYYYYYY8Low
Bălaşa et al. (2015) [15]YYYYYYYY8Low
Ball et al. (2023) [16]YYYYYYYY8Low
Bandeo et al. (2018) [17]YYYYYYYY8Low
Barnaure et al. (2014) [19]YYYYYYYY8Low
Bing et al. (2009) [20]YYYYYYYY8Low
Braatz et al. (2014) [21]YYYYYYNN6Moderate
Chakroun-Walha et al. (2018) [22]YYYYYYYY8Low
Chaudhari et al. (2014) [23]YYYYYYYY8Low
Chiang et al. (2019) [25]YYYYYYYY8Low
Chou et al. (2004) [26]YYYYYYYY8Low
Decker et al. (2009) [27]YYYYYYYY8Low
Deguchi et al. (2012) [28]YYYYYYYY8Low
Dhawan et al. (2010) [29]YYYYYNNN5Low
Di Stefano et al. (2019) [30]YYYYYNNN5Moderate
Doi et al. [101]YYYYNNNN4High
Doi et al. [31]YYYYYYYY8Low
Fujii et al. [32]YYYYYYYY8Low
Gowan et al. [33]YYYYYYYY8Low
Grossbach et al. [34]YYYYYYYY8Low
Hama et al. [35]YYYYYYYY8Low
Han et al. [36]YYYYYNYY7Low
Hayashi et al. [37]YYYNYNNY5Mod
Hebant et al. [38]YYYYYYYY8Low
Ho et al. [12]YYYYYYYY8Low
Honda et al. [13]YYYYYYYY8Low
Jesrani et al. [39]YYYYYYYY8Low
Jia et al. [40]YYYYYYYY8Low
Kachi et al. [41]YYYYYYYY8Low
Kitaguchi et al. [43]YYYYYYYY8Low
Lamotte et al. [44]YYYYYYYY8Low
Lee et al. [45]YYYYYYYY8Low
Liu et al. [46]YYYYYYYY8Low
Maciel et al. [47]YYYYYYYY8Low
Maier et al. [50] YYYYYYYY8Low
Malhotra et al. [48]YYYYYYYY8Low
Maruyama et al. [50]YYYYYYYY8Low
Matsumoto et al. [51]YYYYYYNN6Moderate
McCarron et al. [52]YYYYYYYY8Low
Moosa et al. [53] YYYYYYYY8Low
Nagato et al. [54]YYYYYYYY8Low
Nanba et al. [55]YYYYYYYY8Low
Navarro-Ballester et al. [56]YYYYYYYY8Low
Ocek et al. [57]YYYYYYYY8Low
Ogaki et al. [66]YYYYYYYY8Low
Ohashi et al. [58] YYYYYYYY8Low
Onomura et al. [59]YYYYYYYY8Low
Osman et al. [60]YYYYYYYY8Low
Ou et al. [61]YYYYYYYY8Low
Raya et al. [62]YYYYYYYY8Low
Resorlu et al. [63]YYYY NNNN4High
Ribeiro et al. [65] YYYYYYYY8Low
Sallah et al. [64]YYYYYYYY8Low
Sharma et al. [67] YYYYYYYY8Low
Shimizu et al. [68]YYYYYYYY8Low
Srinivasan et al. [69]YYYYYYYY8Low
Tan et al. [70]YYYYYYYY8Low
Tari Capone et al. [71]YYYYYYYY8Low
Thambisetty et al. [72]YYYYYYYY8Low
Tortora et al. [73]YYYYYYYY8Low
Vaysman et al. [75]YYYYYYYY8Low
Wakely et al. [76]YYYYYYYY8Low
Wittgrove et al. [77] YYYYYYYY8Low
Yamagami et al. [78]YYYYYYYY8Low
Yokoyama et al. [79]YYYYYYYY8Low
Zhang et al. [80]YYYYYYYY8Low
Havenon et al. [81]YYYYYYYY8Low
Milia et al. [82]YYYYYYYY8Low
Samara et al. [83] YYYYYYYY8Low
Liu et al. [84]YYYYYYYY8Low
Chan et al. [87]YYYYYYYY8Low
Gocmen et al. [85]YYYYYYYY8Low
Marrone et al. [86] YYYYYYYY8Low
Agarwal et al. [88]YYYYYYYY8Low
Choh et al. [89] YYYYYYYY8Low
Khokhar et al. [90]YYYYYYYY8Low
Srichawla et al. [95] YYYYYYYY8Low
Q1. Were the patient’s demographic characteristics clearly described? Q2. Was the patient’s history clearly described and presented as a timeline? Q3. Was the current clinical condition of the patient on presentation clearly described? Q4. Were diagnostic tests or assessment methods and the results clearly described? Q5. Was the intervention(s) or treatment procedure(s) clearly described? Q6. Was the post-intervention clinical condition clearly described? Q7. Were adverse events (harms) or unanticipated events identified and described? Q8. Does the case report provide takeaway lessons? Overall: Sum of points. Y—Yes; N—No; U—Unclear; NA—Not applicable.
Table 4. Assessment of retrospective cohort studies using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale.
Table 4. Assessment of retrospective cohort studies using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale.
StudySelection (4 Score)Comparability (2 Score)Outcome (3 Score)Total
Ahn et al. (2004) [7]********8
Bansal et al. (2020) [18]*** *4
Brewer et al. [97]********8
Chen et al. (2017) [91]*********9
Chou et al. (2004) [26]********8
Fitzgerald et al. (2015) [92]********8
Li et al. [98]********8
McKinney et al. (2013) [2]********8
McKinney et al. (2007) [93]********8
Raman et al. (2017) [99]********8
Yoon et al. (2013) [100]********8
Aygunes et al. (2024) [94]********8

Limitations and Future Direction

This review has several limitations. First, the included studies predominantly consisted of case reports and small retrospective cohort studies, limiting the generalizability of our findings. The heterogeneity observed (I2 = 71%, τ2 = 0.2046) suggests variability in study designs, diagnostic criteria, and patient populations. Our meta-analysis attempts to address this through random-effects modeling. Additionally, publication bias may have influenced our results, as suggested by the asymmetry in the funnel plot and influential studies identified in the Baujat plot. The reliance on English-language studies may also introduce selection bias. Although we show that cvPRES has a higher mean MAP compared to isolated PRES seen in other studies, head-to-head studies needs to be completed to validate this. Further research is needed to better elucidate the pathophysiology and optimal management of central-variant PRES. Prospective studies with larger sample sizes and standardized diagnostic criteria are essential to validate our findings and explore the impact of specific interventions on patient outcomes. Symptoms and clinical characteristics of cvPRES appear to be similar to those of normal PRES; however, this should be studied using a comparator group. Moreover, longitudinal studies examining the long-term cognitive and functional sequelae of central-variant PRES could provide valuable insights into its prognosis. Finally, the integration of advanced hemodynamic monitoring, particularly those techniques that can measure the rate of MAP changes to estimate cerebral perfusion pressure and autoregulatory changes within the cerebral vasculature, will be necessary to identify the exact pathophysiological underpinnings of cvPRES compared to its typical clinico-radiographic presentation.

5. Conclusions

Central-variant PRES (cvPRES) manifests predominantly in younger adults with severe hypertension, most often involving the pons and other central structures (i.e., subcortical nuclei, brainstem, cerebellum, and spinal cord), and has a pooled incidence rate of 13% amongst cohort studies of PRES. Despite higher blood pressures and critical brainstem edema, outcomes are generally favorable (2% mortality), reflecting reversible vasogenic injury rather than permanent neuronal damage. Cases of cvPRES have a higher MAP compared to that what is reported in the literature of typical PRES. However, this needs to be supported with original studies. Early recognition of its distinctive imaging pattern and prompt blood-pressure management are key to optimizing recovery. Future prospective studies should standardize diagnostic criteria, elucidate underlying autoregulatory mechanisms, and evaluate targeted interventions to further improve patient outcomes.

Author Contributions

B.S.S. completed the literature review, drafted the initial manuscript, generated illustrations/figures, provided intellectual verification of the topic, and edited the final manuscript. M.A.G.-D. drafted the initial manuscript. B.S.S. and B.S. provided intellectual verification on this topic. All authors reviewed the final draft of the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this article. Further enquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there are no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Hinchey, J.; Chaves, C.; Appignani, B.; Breen, J.; Pao, L.; Wang, A.; Pessin, M.S.; Lamy, C.; Mas, J.L.; Caplan, L.R. A reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy syndrome. N. Engl. J. Med. 1996, 334, 494–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. McKinney, A.M.; Jagadeesan, B.D.; Truwit, C.L. Central-variant posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome: Brainstem or basal ganglia involvement lacking cortical or subcortical cerebral edema. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2013, 201, 631–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021, 372, n71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Abe, T.; Tokuda, Y. Recurrent posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome of the brainstem in a hypertensive patient with end-stage renal disease. J. Emergencies Trauma Shock 2014, 7, 242–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Abraham, P.; Longardner, K.; Chen, P.; Huisa, B.; Handwerker, J. Case 279: Central-Variant Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome. Radiology 2020, 296, 239–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Abusabha, Y.; Petridis, A.K.; Kraus, B.; Kamp, M.A.; Steiger, H.J.; Beseoglu, K. Life-threatening posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in the cerebellum treated by posterior fossa decompression. Acta Neurochir. (Wien.) 2017, 159, 1325–1328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Ahn, K.J.; You, W.J.; Jeong, S.L.; Lee, J.W.; Kim, B.S.; Lee, J.H.; Yang, D.W.; Son, Y.M.; Hahn, S.T. Atypical manifestations of reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy syndrome: Findings on diffusion imaging and ADC mapping. Neuroradiology 2004, 46, 978–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Akhondian, J.; Ashrafzadeh, F.; Seilanian Toosi, F.; Behnam, M.; Beiraghi Toosi, M.; Imannezhad, S.; Akhoundian, M.R.; Hashemi, N. A case report of Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome with spinal cord involvement (PRES-SCI) as an atypical presentation of PRES in children. Iran. J. Child Neurol. 2022, 16, 149–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Andour, H.; Cheraqui, A.; Lahfidi, A.; Fikri, M.; Ech-Cherif El Kettani, N.; Jiddane, M.; Touarsa, F. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES): Should more attention be paid to the atypical forms? Radiol. Case Rep. 2023, 18, 545–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Arai, M.; Shigeno, K.; Wada, M. A reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy syndrome in a patient with classical polyarteritis nodosa. Clin. Neurol. 1997, 37, 64–66. [Google Scholar]
  11. Aridon, P.; Ragonese, P.; Mazzola, M.A.; Quintini, G.; Lo Re, M.; Talamanca, S.; Terruso, V.; D'Amelio, M.; Savettieri, G. Reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy syndrome in a patient with thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura. Neurol. Sci. 2011, 32, 469–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Ho, T.H.; Tsai, C.L.; Hsu, Y.D.; Lee, J.T.; Yang, F.C.; Hsu, C.C.; Lin, C.C. Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome Mimicking Brainstem Infarction: A Dilemma. Acta Neurol. Taiwan. 2016, 25, 56–59. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  13. Honda, K.; Hashimoto, S. Brainstem Cerebellum-type Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome. Intern. Med. 2020, 59, 1337–1338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Bag, A.K.; Curé, J.K.; Sullivan, J.C.; Roberson, G.H. Central variant of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in systemic lupus erythematosus: New associations? Lupus 2010, 19, 225–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Bălaşa, R.; Maier, S.; Baubec, E.G.; Bajkó, Z.; Bălaşa, A. Cerebellar and brainstem variant of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. Acta Neurol. Belg. 2015, 115, 401–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Ball, A.M.; Rayi, A.; Gustafson, M. A Rare Association of Hypomagnesemia and Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome (PRES). Cureus 2023, 15, e41572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Bandeo, L.; Rausch, A.; Saucedo, M.; Chertcoff, A.; Cejas, L.L.; Roca, C.U.; Pacha, S.; Pardal, M.F.; Reisin, R.; Bonardo, P. Convexity Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Secondary to Adalidumab in a Patient with Ulcerative Colitis. J. Vasc. Interv. Neurol. 2018, 10, 62–64. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  18. Bansal, S.; Bansal, R.; Goyal, M.K.; Takkar, A.; Singh, R.; Singh, P.; Lal, V. Clinical, Etiological and Imaging Profile of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome: A Prospective and Follow-Up Study. Ann. Indian. Acad. Neurol. 2020, 23, 182–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Barnaure, I.; Horvath, J.; Lovblad, K.O.; Vargas, M.I. Atypical brainstem presentation of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES). J. Neuroradiol. 2014, 41, 143–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Bing, F.; M'Biene, S.; Gay, S. Brainstem Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome With Spinal Cord Involvement (PRES-SCI). Rev. Neurol. (Paris) 2020, 176, 874–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Braatz, V.L.; Lorenzoni, P.J.; Kay, C.S.; Chula, D.C.; Scola, R.H.; Werneck, L.C. Brainstem reversible leukoencephalopathy syndrome. Arq. Neuropsiquiatr. 2014, 72, 83–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Chakroun-Walha, O.; Bacha, I.; Frikha, M.; Ben Mahfoudh, K.; Rekik, N. A rare case of acute posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome involving brainstem in a child. J. Acute Dis. 2016, 5, 521–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Chaudhari, D.M.; Renjen, P.N.; Goyal, N.; Mishra, A. Central variant reversible encephalopathy syndrome. BMJ Case Rep. 2022, 15, 245636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Chen, D.Y.; Tseng, Y.C.; Hsu, H.L.; Huang, Y.L.; Chen, C.J. Teaching neuroimages: Central variant of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. Neurology 2014, 82, e164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Chiang, W.F.; Chen, P.T.; Chen, Y.L.; Chen, M.H. Atypical posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in a noncompliant hemodialysis patient: Case report and literature review. Hemodial. Int. 2019, 23, e100–e103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Chou, M.-C.; Lai, P.-H.; Yeh, L.-R.; Yuan, M.-K.; Liang, H.-L.; Chen, C.; Pan, H.-B.; Yang, C.-F.; Li, J.-Y.; Lo, Y.-K. Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome: Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in 12 Cases. Kaohsiung J. Med. Sci. 2004, 20, 381–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Decker, D.A.; Falchook, A.D.; Yachnis, A.T.; Waters, M.F. Radiographic and pathologic findings in an atypical brainstem variant of reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy syndrome. Neurologist 2009, 15, 364–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Deguchi, I.M.D.; Uchino, A.M.D.; Suzuki, H.M.D.; Tanahashi, N.M.D. Malignant Hypertension with Reversible Brainstem Hypertensive Encephalopathy and Thrombotic Microangiopathy. J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. 2012, 21, 915.e7–915.e20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Dhawan, S.R.; Goswami, J.N.; Suthar, R.; Dayal, D.; Vyas, S.; Singhi, P.D. A Child with Central Variant Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome. Neuropediatrics 2019, 50, 66–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Di Stefano, V.; Rispoli, M.G.; Onofrj, M.; De Angelis, M.V. Tumour-like presentation of atypical posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome with prominent brainstem involvement. BMJ Case Rep. 2020, 13, 231687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Doi, Y.; Kimura, F.; Fujiyama, T.; Fujimura, C.; Nishina, T.; Sato, T.; Hosokawa, T.; Uehara, H.; Ishida, S.; Hanafusa, T. Hypertensive brainstem encephalopathy without parieto-occipital lesion—Two case reports. Neurol. Med.-Chir. 2006, 46, 75–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Fujii, N.; Fujii, H.; Matsuki, M.; Doi, S.; Isozaki, T.; Watanabe, Y.; Nakamata, A.; Fujita, A.; Mori, H. Optic pathway involvement in the posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome: A case report and review of the literature. Radiol. Case Rep. 2023, 18, 3769–3772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Gowan, J.M.; Liu, A. Isolated pan-pontine posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in a patient with uncontrolled hypertension. Clin. Case Rep. 2019, 7, 32–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Grossbach, A.J.; Abel, T.J.; Hodis, B.; Wassef, S.N.; Greenlee, J.D.W. Hypertensive posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome causing posterior fossa edema and hydrocephalus. J. Clin. Neurosci. 2014, 21, 207–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Hama, R.; Oshikawa, H. Brainstem Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome. Intern. Med. 2019, 58, 2901–2902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Han, N.; Sun, Z.; Zhou, C.; Shen, Y.; Li, G.; Wang, J. Central-variant posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome with bilateral corticospinal tract involvement: A case report. Acta Neurol. Belg. 2021, 121, 265–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Hayashi, Y.; Hashida, T.; Yazaki, M.; Uchida, T.; Watanabe, E. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) of the isolated brainstem. Clin. Case Rep. 2022, 10, e05712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Hebant, B.; Guegan-Massardier, E.; Triquenot-Bagan, A.; Ozkul-Wermester, O. Atypical MRI presentation of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome with predominant brainstem involvement. Acta Neurol. Belg. 2019, 119, 123–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Jesrani, G.; Gupta, S.; Arya, Y.; Syal, A.; Gupta, M. Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Induced Central Variant of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome: A Rare Association. Cureus 2021, 13, e13431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Jia, L.J.; Qu, Z.Z.; Zhang, X.Q.; Tian, Y.J.; Wang, Y. Uremic encephalopathy with isolated brainstem involvement revealed by magnetic resonance image: A case report. BMC Neurol. 2017, 17, 154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Kachi, S.; Nomura, T.; Yamada, K.; Oshima, Y.; Ura, S. Atypical posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome associated with Sjögren's syndrome: A case report. Rinsho Shinkeigaku 2023, 63, 159–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Katano, K.; Kakuchi, Y.; Nakashima, A.; Nakahama, K.; Kawano, M. Apparent diffusion coefficient map based on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging is useful in diagnosing the brainstem variant of reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy syndrome with uremia. Clin. Exp. Nephrol. 2010, 14, 479–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Kitaguchi, H.; Tomimoto, H.; Miki, Y.; Yamamoto, A.; Terada, K.; Satoi, H.; Kanda, M.; Fukuyama, H. A brainstem variant of reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy syndrome. Neuroradiology 2005, 47, 652–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Lamotte, G.; Lenka, A. Brainstem Predominant Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome. Neurol. India 2021, 69, 536–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Lee, S.W.; Lee, S.J. Central-Variant Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome with Albuminocytologic Dissociation. Case Rep. Neurol. 2018, 10, 29–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Liu, C.; Cao, J.; Su, Z.; Xu, S. Isolated brainstem involvement in posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome: A case report and review of the literature. Int. J. Neurosci. 2019, 129, 808–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Maciel, R.; Nzwalo, H.; Palma, R.; Martins, A.; Shamassa, M.; Pizhin, D. The Resolution of Central Variant of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome. Neurohospitalist 2015, 5, 91–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Malhotra, K.; Mazumder, R.; Blanco, M.B.; Liebeskind, D.S. Atypical case of central-variant posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. Acta Neurol. Belg. 2017, 117, 413–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Maier, S.; Monica, C.; Romaniuc, A.; Andone, S.; Bălaşa, R. Central-variant posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in a young patient with systemic lupus erythematosus. Acta Neurol. Belg. 2019, 119, 269–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Maruyama, H.; Fujikawa, H.; Takimiya, R.; Sato, H. Simultaneous Presentation of Brainstem and Cerebellar Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome With Acute Cerebral Infarction. Cureus 2023, 15, e34843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Matsumoto, N.; Ogawa, T.; Hishikawa, N.; Takao, Y.; Fujii, S. Dramatic Amelioration in Serial Magnetic Resonance Imaging in an "Isolated Brainstem" Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome Case. Yonago Acta Med. 2023, 66, 297–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. McCarron, M.O.; McKinstry, C.S. Vanishing brainstem edema. J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. 2008, 17, 156–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Moosa, A.N.; Eagam, M.; Moodley, M. Reversible brainstem edema due to hypertensive encephalopathy in an 8-year-old girl. J. Child. Neurol. 2011, 26, 1033–1035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Nagato, M.; Takahashi, Y.; Yoshioka, M.; Nambu, M. A case of hypertensive encephalopathy with extensive spinal lesions on MRI. Brain Dev. 2010, 32, 598–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Nanba, T.; Kashimura, H.; Saura, H.; Takeda, M. Subarachnoid hemorrhage due to ruptured intracranial aneurysm following posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. J. Neurosci. Rural. Pract. 2016, 7, 440–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Navarro-Ballester, A.; Revert-Espí, R. Unusual Presentation of a Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome With Brainstem Involvement and Subarachnoid Haemorrhage. Cureus 2021, 13, e16295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Ocek, L.; Sener, U.; Demirtas, B.S.; Ozcelik, M.M.; Oztekin, O.; Zorlu, Y. Central-Variant Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy due to Sulfasalazine: A Case Report. Med. Princ. Pract. 2015, 24, 578–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Ohashi, E.; Hayakawa, I.; Tsutsumi, Y.; Kamei, K.; Ide, K.; Abe, Y. Central-variant posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in an infant with mid-aortic syndrome: A rare case of symmetric basal ganglia lesions. Radiol. Case Rep. 2022, 17, 3475–3480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Onomura, H.; Shimizu, T.; Suzuki, J.; Nakai, N.; Teramachi, Y.; Tomonori, K.; Akiguchi, I.; Ito, Y. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome presenting with thrombotic microangiopathy triggered by malignant hypertension: A case report and literature review. BMJ Neurol. Open 2022, 4, e000296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Osman, Y.; Imam, Y.Z.; Salem, K.; Al-Hail, H.; Uthman, B.; Deleu, D. Isolated Brainstem Involvement in a Patient with Hypertensive Encephalopathy. Case Rep. Neurol. Med. 2013, 2013, 540947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Ou, S.; Xia, L.; Wang, L.; Xia, L.; Zhou, Q.; Pan, S. Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome With Isolated Involving Infratentorial Structures. Front. Neurol. 2018, 9, 843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Raya, M.; Nasir, I.; Liu, A. Atypical presentation of cerebellar posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in a patient with HIV. Clin. Case Rep. 2020, 8, 262–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Resorlu, M.; Karatag, O.; Aylanc, N.; Ozturk, M.O.; Toprak, C.A. Posterior reversible encephalopathy with brainstem involvement. Intern. Emerg. Med. 2018, 13, 455–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Sallah, Y.H.; Zubair, A.S.; Dewey, J.J. Extensive Brainstem Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome in a Hemodialysis Non-Adherent Patient. Cureus 2021, 13, e14523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Ribeiro, S.; Monteiro, M.; Moreira, B.; França, M. Rare posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in a patient with HIV. BMJ Case Rep. 2013, 2013, 201495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Ogaki, K.; Fukae, J.; Noda, K.; Fujishima, K.; Hattori, N.; Okuma, Y. Blurred Vision With Acute Hypertension Indicating Hypertensive Brainstem Encephalopathy: Case Report. Neurol. Med. -Chir. 2009, 49, 625–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Sharma, S.; Gupta, R.; Sehgal, R.; Aggarwal, K.C. Atypical presentation of posterior reversible encephalopathy: In a child with bilateral grade IV vesicoureteric reflux. J. Trop. Pediatr. 2014, 60, 331–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Shimizu, Y.; Tha, K.K.; Iguchi, A.; Cho, Y.; Yoshida, A.; Fujima, N.; Tsukahara, A.; Shirato, H.; Terae, S. Isolated posterior fossa involvement in posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. Neuroradiol. J. 2013, 26, 514–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Srinivasan, K.G.; Balasubramanian, P.; Mayilvaganan, K.R.; Kannan, U.N.; Bilal, M. Central variant of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome—A rare case report. J. Clin. Diagn. Res. 2017, 11, TD01–TD02. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Tan, Y.Y.; Tan, K. Hypertensive brainstem encephalopathy: A diagnosis often overlooked. Clin. Med. (Lond.) 2019, 19, 511–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Tari Capone, F.; Candela, S.; Bozzao, A.; Orzi, F. A new case of brainstem variant of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome: Clinical and radiological features. Neurol. Sci. 2015, 36, 1263–1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Thambisetty, M.; Biousse, V.; Newman, N.J. Hypertensive brainstem encephalopathy: Clinical and radiographic features. J. Neurol. Sci. 2003, 208, 93–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Tortora, F.; Caranci, F.; Belfiore, M.P.; Manzi, F.; Pagliano, P.; Cirillo, S. Brainstem variant of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome: A case report. Neuroradiol. J. 2015, 28, 634–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Tsutsumi, M.; Akimoto, J.; Nakajima, N.; Hashimoto, R.; Haraoka, J. Two cases of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome resembling brainstem glioma. Clin. Neurol. Neurosurg. 2012, 114, 1062–1065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Vaysman, T.; Xu, P.; Vartanian, T.; Michalak, P.; Pike, K.; Liu, A. "Highlighting" red nuclei by atypical posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in a patient with systemic lupus erythematosus. Clin. Case Rep. 2019, 7, 1404–1408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Wakely, S.L.; Ditchfield, A. Hypertensive encephalopathy: A rare case of isolated pons involvement. Clin. Radiol. Extra 2005, 60, E53–E56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Wittgrove, C.; Kaur, H.; Siddiqui, J.H. Atypical Variant of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome in the Setting of Renovascular Hypertension: Case Report and Review of Literature. Cureus 2018, 10, e3573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Yamagami, K.; Maeda, Y.; Iihara, K. Variant Type of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome Associated with Deep Brain Hemorrhage: Case Report and Review of the Literature. World Neurosurg. 2020, 134, 176–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Yokoyama, J.; Yamaguchi, H.; Koge, J.; Matsushita, T.; Isobe, N.; Yamasaki, R.; Kira, J.I. Brainstem posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in a case with Guillain–Barré syndrome. Clin. Exp. Neuroimmunol. 2019, 10, 267–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Zhang, Y.X.; Zheng, Y.; Zhang, B.J.; Zhang, Y.; Ding, M.P.; Zhang, B.R. Variant Type of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome with Diffuse Cerebral White Matter and Brainstem Involvement Associated with Intracranial Hemorrhage. J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. 2016, 25, e233–e235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. de Havenon, A.; Joos, Z.; Longenecker, L.; Shah, L.; Ansari, S.; Digre, K. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome with spinal cord involvement. Neurology 2014, 83, 2002–2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Milia, A.; Moller, J.; Pilia, G.; Mascia, M.G.; Marchi, P.; Mura, M.; Marrosu, M.G. Spinal cord involvement during hypertensive encephalopathy: Clinical and radiological findings. J. Neurol. 2008, 255, 142–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Samara, A.; Berry, B.; Ghannam, M. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome with isolated infratentorial involvement: A case report. Radiol. Case Rep. 2019, 14, 576–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Liu, L.; Dai, D.; Cao, F.; Zhang, L.; Wang, X. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome with spinal cord involvement but without hemisphere lesions: A case report. Medicine 2019, 98, e13649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Gocmen, R.; Ardicli, D.; Erarslan, Y.; Duzova, A.; Anlar, B. Reversible Hypertensive Myelopathy-The Spinal Cord Variant of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome. Neuropediatrics 2017, 48, 115–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Marrone, L.C.; Martins, W.A.; Brunelli, J.P.; Fussiger, H.; Carvalhal, G.F.; Filho, J.R.; Soder, R.B.; Schuck, M.; Viola, F.S.; Marrone, A.C.; et al. PRES with asymptomatic spinal cord involvement. Is this scenario more common than we know? Spinal Cord. Ser. Cases 2016, 2, 15001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Chan, P.K.J.; Tse, K.S.; Fok, W.S.E.; Poon, W.L. First case of neurofibromatosis with posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome showing spinal cord involvement. Indian. J. Radiol. Imaging 2018, 28, 161–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Agarwal, H.; Sebastian, L.J.D.; Gaikwad, S.B.; Garg, A.; Mishra, N.K. Spinal cord involvement and contrast enhancement in posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. BJR Case Rep. 2016, 2, 20150326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Choh, N.A.; Jehangir, M.; Rasheed, M.; Mira, T.; Ahmad, I.; Choh, S. Involvement of the cervical cord and medulla in posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. Ann. Saudi Med. 2011, 31, 90–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Khokhar, H.V.; Choudhary, P.; Saxena, S.; Arif, M. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome with spinal cord involvement (PRES-SCI): A case report. Ann. Indian. Acad. Neurol. 2016, 19, 134–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Chen, T.-Y.; Wu, T.-C.; Ko, C.-C.; Feng, I.J.; Tsui, Y.-K.; Lin, C.-J.; Chen, J.-H.; Lin, C.-P. Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Diffusion-Weighted Imaging Evaluation of the Supratentorial Brain Regions in Patients Diagnosed with Brainstem Variant of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome: A Preliminary Study. J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. 2017, 26, 1560–1568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Fitzgerald, R.T.; Samant, R.S.; Kumar, M.; Van Hemert, R.; Angtuaco, E.J. Features of infratentorial-predominant posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. Acta Neurol. Belg. 2015, 115, 629–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. McKinney, A.M.; Short, J.; Truwit, C.L.; McKinney, Z.J.; Kozak, O.S.; SantaCruz, K.S.; Teksam, M. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome: Incidence of atypical regions of involvement and imaging findings. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2007, 189, 904–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Aygunes, U.; Sasmaz, H.I.; Arpaci, T.; Akbas, T.; Ozcan, N.; Antmen, A.B. Clinical and Radiological Characteristics of Classical and Variant Type of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome on Prognosis Following Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Pediatric Patients: A Single-Center Experience. Exp. Clin. Transplant. 2024, 22, 800–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Srichawla, B.S.; Kipkorir, V.; Lalla, R. Central-variant posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in association with adrenal insufficiency: A case report. Med. (Baltim.) 2025, 104, e41625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Yiş, U.; Karaoğlu, P.; Kurul, S.H.; Soylu, A.; Çakmakçi, H.; Kavukçu, S. Posterior reversible leukoencephalopathy syndrome with spinal cord involvement in a 9-year-old girl. Brain Dev. 2016, 38, 154–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Brewer, J.; Owens, M.Y.; Wallace, K.; Reeves, A.A.; Morris, R.; Khan, M.; Lamarca, B.; Martin Jr, J.N. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in 46 of 47 patients with eclampsia. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2013, 208, 468.e1–468.e6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Li, Y.M.D.P.; Gor, D.M.D.; Walicki, D.M.T.; Jenny, D.R.N.; Jones, D.M.D.; Barbour, P.M.D.; Castaldo, J.M.D. Spectrum and Potential Pathogenesis of Reversible Posterior Leukoencephalopathy Syndrome. J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. 2012, 21, 873–882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Raman, R.; Devaramane, R.; Jagadish, G.M.; Chowdaiah, S. Various Imaging Manifestations of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome (PRES) on Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). Pol. J. Radiol. 2017, 82, 64–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Yoon, S.D.; Cho, B.M.; Oh, S.M.; Park, S.H.; Jang, I.B.; Lee, J.Y. Clinical and radiological spectrum of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. J. Cerebrovasc. Endovasc. Neurosurg. 2013, 15, 206–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Doi, H.; Yokote, H.; Uchihara, T.; Toru, S. Bilateral Optic Nerve Edema in Central-variant Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome. Intern. Med. 2020, 59, 2333–2334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Fugate, J.E.; Claassen, D.O.; Cloft, H.J.; Kallmes, D.F.; Kozak, O.S.; Rabinstein, A.A. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome: Associated clinical and radiologic findings. Mayo Clin. Proc. 2010, 85, 427–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Rabinstein, A.A.; Mandrekar, J.; Merrell, R.; Kozak, O.S.; Durosaro, O.; Fugate, J.E. Blood pressure fluctuations in posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. 2012, 21, 254–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Srichawla, B.S.; Garcia-Dominguez, M.A. Regional dynamic cerebral autoregulation across anterior and posterior circulatory territories: A detailed exploration and its clinical implications. World J. Crit. Care Med. 2024, 13, 97149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Srichawla, B.S.; Catton, R.M.; Lichtenberg, A.A.; Henninger, N. Clinical characteristics and risk factors for bilateral lateral geniculate body pathology: A systematic review of the literature. Neurol. Sci. 2023, 44, 3481–3493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Schwartz, R.B. Hyperperfusion encephalopathies: Hypertensive encephalopathy and related conditions. Neurologist 2002, 8, 22–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Beausang-Linder, M.; Bill, A. Cerebral circulation in acute arterial hypertension--protective effects of sympathetic nervous activity. Acta Physiol. Scand. 1981, 111, 193–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Singh, T.D.; Fugate, J.E.; Rabinstein, A.A. Central pontine and extrapontine myelinolysis: A systematic review. Eur. J. Neurol. 2014, 21, 1443–1450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Chen, P.-R.; Chen, S.-P. Posterior reversible encephalopathy as the first manifestation of Bickerstaff's brainstem encephalitis. BMC Neurol. 2016, 16, 215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram of included studies.
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram of included studies.
Neurolint 17 00113 g001
Figure 2. Forest plot depicting the pooled incidence rate of events across studies using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. Individual study proportions with 95% confidence intervals are shown alongside their respective weights under both models. The random-effects pooled estimate is 0.13 (95% CI: 0.09–0.18), indicating moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 71%, τ2 = 0.2046, p < 0.01). The diamond represents the overall effect size and its confidence interval for the random-effects model [2,7,26,92,94,97,98,99].
Figure 2. Forest plot depicting the pooled incidence rate of events across studies using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. Individual study proportions with 95% confidence intervals are shown alongside their respective weights under both models. The random-effects pooled estimate is 0.13 (95% CI: 0.09–0.18), indicating moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 71%, τ2 = 0.2046, p < 0.01). The diamond represents the overall effect size and its confidence interval for the random-effects model [2,7,26,92,94,97,98,99].
Neurolint 17 00113 g002
Figure 3. Funnel plot assessing publication bias in the included studies. The x-axis represents the logit-transformed proportion of events, while the y-axis represents the standard error. Open circles indicate individual studies, with the dashed diagonal lines representing the 95% confidence interval around the pooled effect estimate. Symmetry in the plot suggests minimal publication bias; however, asymmetry could indicate potential bias or heterogeneity in the included studies. Filled circles represent imputed studies added using the trim-and-fill method to adjust for potential bias [2,7,26,92,94,97,98,99].
Figure 3. Funnel plot assessing publication bias in the included studies. The x-axis represents the logit-transformed proportion of events, while the y-axis represents the standard error. Open circles indicate individual studies, with the dashed diagonal lines representing the 95% confidence interval around the pooled effect estimate. Symmetry in the plot suggests minimal publication bias; however, asymmetry could indicate potential bias or heterogeneity in the included studies. Filled circles represent imputed studies added using the trim-and-fill method to adjust for potential bias [2,7,26,92,94,97,98,99].
Neurolint 17 00113 g003
Figure 4. Baujat plot illustrating the contribution of individual studies to overall heterogeneity and their influence on the pooled effect size. The x-axis represents the contribution of each study to overall heterogeneity, while the y-axis indicates the study’s influence on the overall result. Studies located further from the origin exhibit a higher impact on heterogeneity and/or the pooled effect. In this analysis, McKinney et al. (2013) and Raman et al. (2017) demonstrate notable contributions to heterogeneity and influence on the pooled estimate, suggesting their potential role in driving variability within the meta-analysis [2,7,26,92,94,97,98,99].
Figure 4. Baujat plot illustrating the contribution of individual studies to overall heterogeneity and their influence on the pooled effect size. The x-axis represents the contribution of each study to overall heterogeneity, while the y-axis indicates the study’s influence on the overall result. Studies located further from the origin exhibit a higher impact on heterogeneity and/or the pooled effect. In this analysis, McKinney et al. (2013) and Raman et al. (2017) demonstrate notable contributions to heterogeneity and influence on the pooled estimate, suggesting their potential role in driving variability within the meta-analysis [2,7,26,92,94,97,98,99].
Neurolint 17 00113 g004
Table 1. Databases queried including the search string utilized.
Table 1. Databases queried including the search string utilized.
Database Search String
PubMed/PubMedCentral/MEDLINE(“Posterior Leukoencephalopathy Syndrome” OR “Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome” OR “PRES”) AND (“central variant” OR “central variant” OR “brainstem” OR “spinal cord”)
ScienceDirect(“Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome” OR “PRES”) AND (“central variant” OR “brainstem” OR “spinal cord”)
Scopus(“Posterior Leukoencephalopathy Syndrome” OR “Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome” OR “PRES”) AND (“central-variant” OR “central variant” OR “brainstem” OR “spinal cord”)
Hinari(“Posterior Leukoencephalopathy Syndrome” OR “Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome” OR “PRES”) AND (“central variant” OR “central variant” OR “brainstem” OR “spinal cord”)
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Srichawla, B.S.; Garcia-Dominguez, M.A.; Silver, B. The Central Variant of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Neurol. Int. 2025, 17, 113. https://doi.org/10.3390/neurolint17070113

AMA Style

Srichawla BS, Garcia-Dominguez MA, Silver B. The Central Variant of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Neurology International. 2025; 17(7):113. https://doi.org/10.3390/neurolint17070113

Chicago/Turabian Style

Srichawla, Bahadar S., Maria A. Garcia-Dominguez, and Brian Silver. 2025. "The Central Variant of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis" Neurology International 17, no. 7: 113. https://doi.org/10.3390/neurolint17070113

APA Style

Srichawla, B. S., Garcia-Dominguez, M. A., & Silver, B. (2025). The Central Variant of Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Neurology International, 17(7), 113. https://doi.org/10.3390/neurolint17070113

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop