Published Feb 16, 2009
DaisyChains
18 Posts
My grandmother had a hemorrhagic stroke a few months ago, and while she did have a headache and unilateral weakness at the time of the stroke, she has had no lasting effects. She is just as good as ever, even though she is obese at 80 years old.
I've always assumed that a stroke ALWAYS causes some lasting effects, especially since the leaked blood damages brain tissue. Right?
I'm puzzled because my Mother suddenly died of a hemorrhagic stroke at only 55 years old; and then her Mother has a bleed at 80 and suffers no effects what-so-ever.
Don't get me wrong, I'm happy that my grandmother is doing well, but like I said, I was under the impression that a stroke ALWAYS causes injury. I'm just a bit confounded because this wasn't like a TIA, it was an actual bleed.
Anyone have any experience or knowledge of why a bleed wouldn't have any lasting effects? So, it just bled a "little tiny" bit, and then sealed itself off?
I'm so confused here.
BrnEyedGirl, BSN, MSN, RN, APRN
1,236 Posts
This is the reason for the stroke education campaign that stresses immediate care for symptoms. I have seen some amazing come backs from quick treatment for both types of strokes. It is truly amazing to see a pt that comes in unable to speak, be completely back to normal in sometimes just hours!
Glad to hear grandma is doing well!
whipping girl in 07, RN
697 Posts
Could be if it was slow vs. fast. Sometimes patients come in with a chronic subdural that's been slow onset. It also depends on the area of the brain the bleed is and how large it is. The symptoms of a stroke are caused by cerebral edema; if the area with edema does not actually infarct, once the edema subsides, the symptoms will subside as well.
It's unusual, I'm sure, but it can happen.
And I'm glad to hear she's made a full recovery.