PTSD was associated with smaller volumes in several brain regions
A brain-imaging meta-analysis found regional volume differences between people with posttraumatic stress disorder and controls, including controls who had experienced trauma.
Based on the published abstract. The full paper may contain additional methods, results and limitations.
The 30-second takeaway
People with PTSD had smaller volumes in several brain regions than controls. Similar regional differences appeared in comparisons with trauma-exposed controls, and greater PTSD severity was associated with smaller cerebellar gray matter volumes. These group-level associations do not establish whether the volume differences preceded PTSD or developed after it.
This abstract-based account cannot establish the timing or cause of the regional differences. Follow-up duration is not provided, and the reported group comparisons do not establish diagnostic accuracy for individual patients.
What researchers found
Regional gray and white matter volume
Structural scans compared PTSD patients with controls; similar differences appeared versus trauma-exposed controls. Measurement timeframe is not reported.
Regional measurements were the focus
Researchers compared brain maps rather than reporting a single overall brain-volume result. Gray matter differences involved frontal and temporal regions and the cerebellum; the reported white matter difference also involved the cerebellum.
Symptoms were associated with scan measurements
Higher PTSD severity was associated with smaller cerebellar gray matter volumes. Depression severity also had regional associations among patients. These relationships describe how symptom ratings and scan measurements varied together, without establishing a causal sequence.
The original publication
A whole-brain voxel-based analysis of structural abnormalities in PTSD: An ENIGMA-PGC study.
See CRZ, Si S, Baird CL et al.
Eur Psychiatry · 2025
- PubMed ID
- 40692500
- Record checked
AI-assisted research and writing. This explains one selected publication; it is not a complete review of everything known. Our approach.
One more question, understood.
Keep track of the research you’ve explored.