[FallenPancake]

Hi,

Having got what I can only assume was a concussion roughly six weeks ago, I have (naturally) begun reading more on the subject; specifically, I came upon a few articles regarding seizures. Does anyone have any knowledge concerning realistic numbers of the odds of incurring epilepsy post-concussion? A Stanford site seems to suggest that only a dramatic increase in likely occurrence (15-30%) triggers when the injury sustained was 'severe'- which they say, involves a loss of consciousness, amnesia, or 'bleeding around the brain'. The latter seems like it would be difficult to diagnose if you didn't get a scan in limited time frame. Anyway, would appreciate any answers!

Pancake

[Mark in Idaho]

Pancake,

Welcome to NeuroTalk.

First, seizures related to a brain injury are not usually considered epileptic. They would more commonly be called trauma induced seizures. The seizures may be categorized the same as epileptic seizures. Often, they do not show up on an EEG.

Why do you ask ?

Do you think you are experiencing seizures ?

Or are you just anxious about the risk of epilepsy ?

[FallenPancake]

Originally Posted by Mark in Idaho

Why do you ask ?

Do you think you are experiencing seizures ?

Or are you just anxious about the risk of epilepsy ?

Hi Mark,

I'm mainly concerned that there is some *significant* risk now that the injury has occurred. The Stanford article I mentioned above (no links-new user- eh..) had me concerned at, 'internal bleeding', which seems very hard to determine if not caught in time (which overwhelmingly is not).

So it's really just to get a better idea to know some general metric of possibility, if such a thing even exists.

[Lara]

Welcome to the NeuroTalk Support groups.

I'm just wondering if you were assessed in a hospital setting or by a doctor immediately after your head injury?

[Mark in Idaho]

If internal bleeding is not caught in time by imaging, then yes, it will be hard to determine is it ever happened. But, if there are no symptoms that suggest a bleed, there is nothing to worry about. The ER concern about bleeds is related to discharging the patient with a condition than may get worse in the next 24 to 48 hours. It has more to do with the hospital's liability risk in that they take a CT Scan image, just in case.

But, bleeds often do not even show up in the first few hours so the more important issue is being aware of any symptoms that develop over the next 48 hours or so.

At six weeks post injury, you are long past any risk.

Are you struggling with any symptoms ?

[FallenPancake]

Re Lara, no, have not yet seen a doc; obviously I know that is by far the best option, but insurance coverage recently has become a problem.

Originally Posted by Mark in Idaho

At six weeks post injury, you are long past any risk.

Are you struggling with any symptoms ?

Mark-- I was not sure if not caught via MRI/CT how such a thing would even be traceable, but as I said, was initially concerned regarding that Stanford site I viewed- the 15-30% increase number seemed obviously concerning, and I wasn't sure what constituted a 'bleed'. Thanks.

Pancake