Would you like to be a member of our research panel? Join here - there's (nearly) always a great incentive offered for your views.

large baby?

(12 Posts)
ShitStickSugar Sun 24-Aug-14 21:06:22

At my 20 week scan the machine put my dates 2 weeks earlier then my 6.6 and 12 week scans.

The sheet containing fetal measurements shows all of the measurements as right at the end of the scale and the femur length is actually off the scale! - by a fair distance.

The person that did the scan thought perhaps our dates were wrong. So baby isnt actually huge, but due 2 weeks earlier.

However, the 6.6 and 12 weeks scans showed as spot on for the dates.

Also the 6.6 week scan we saw a heartbeat, which I don't think we would have it was actually 4.6weeks.
Also my bfp wouldn't have been viable!

So this leads me to think that actually my dates are spot on and I am just growing a giant.

Has anyone else experience of having a baby showing as approx. 2 weeks too big?

I will be having another dating scan in a few weeks to see whats happening but any advise or ....... anything! confused

ColdTeaAgain Sun 24-Aug-14 21:14:59

Are you sure they didn't mean growth scan rather than dating scan?

In our department we would not think anything of those measurements at all! If the measurements are in the scale then they fit in with your dates, just at the larger end of the scale. Absolutely fine smile

Also, if their machine are like our then the measurements/weeks taht show up on the screen are not the same as the charts on your report, they are just the factory settings on the machine. I wish there was an option to turn them off as I often get people commenting and questioning their dates!

Are you and your partner tall?

ColdTeaAgain Sun 24-Aug-14 21:15:49

Sorry my typing was rubbish in that post!

ShitStickSugar Sun 24-Aug-14 22:55:54

Sorry yes growth scan! Really 2 weeks difference is normal? Ill try and post a pic of the report.

Neither of us are tall. I am 5.4 and he is 5.6!

ShitStickSugar Sun 24-Aug-14 22:59:40

Hope you can see this...

Elmersnewfriend Sun 24-Aug-14 23:01:34

You need to bear in mind that at this stage, a mm here or there makes a huge difference as to how "average" it all looks. I wouldn't panic just yet!

dreamingofwineandcheese Sun 24-Aug-14 23:02:38

I have been measuring big for dates since 28 weeks. My fundal height has been about 5 weeks ahead and scans every 2 weeks have shown baby with a large (off the chart) abdominal circumference, head is on the 50th centile and femur length is around 90th.

DS was 9lb9oz so I was expecting this baby to be big too. Consultant isn't worried and has given permission for me to be induced at 40 weeks if I want it. I managed to give birth to DS with just gas and air and the pool and it was fine (no stitches) and that was first baby so I'm hopeful for the same with this one.

What the midwives have said to me is that the head is the biggest part, if that was measuring on the 90th centile then that might be an issue but a tummy can squeeze in and the legs are skinny!

ShitStickSugar Mon 25-Aug-14 00:26:45

Thanks! This is excatly what I wanted. 1st baby so worrying about everything! flowers

Lally112 Mon 25-Aug-14 00:36:30

Just keep calm, I consistently measure big with all of mine (because DH is a 6ft6 man giant and they all have his genes), most was measuring 4 weeks ahead from 21 weeks (scan was late) and was born 9 pounds 11 ounces and 4 days late. they will offer you growth scans if they have concerns but you will be fine, just maybe don't buy newborn sized clothes just yet - we start at 0-3 months sized.

ColdTeaAgain Mon 25-Aug-14 21:27:23

Hi OP,

Sorry I am a bit late returning to this thread....

I am confused where from your report you are getting that you measure 2 weeks ahead?

Anyway, yes as Elmers points out, a difference of a few mm at 20 weeks can throw the measurements off by quite a big margin. Do you know if the sonographer double checked them at the time? If I get large measurements I always redo them as quite often It turns out I wasn't being careful enough the first time around.

Your report shows a head circumference (HC) and femur length (FL) just slightly above the 95th centile. However the abdominal circumference is still within the normal range but at the larger end of the scale. This suggests to me that baby is normal size for your dates, just at the bigger end of the scale. If your dates were wrong by as much as 2 weeks we would expect all measurements to be way off the scale. Or if dates are correct but baby is too large because of gestational diabetes for example, then the AC would be out of normal range but other measurements more likely to stay within normal range due to baby getting a big belly, but this is rare as early as 20 weeks.

Basically that was a very long winded way of saying that my professional opinion is that those measurements are fine grin. They may just be being extra vigilant by booking a growth scan, but no harm in that.

ShitStickSugar Tue 26-Aug-14 20:40:27

Thank you! The machine put my due date as 2 week earlier then the due date given at 12 weeks. I assumed this was automatically done when the measurements were input. When the due date was changed to the earlier one, all the little dots went to the middle of the line.
When he puts it as the due date 2 weeks later it shows as the graph I posted.

1st baby = massive worrier!! grin flowers

ShitStickSugar Tue 26-Aug-14 20:41:09

Thank you! The machine put my due date as 2 week earlier then the due date given at 12 weeks. I assumed this was automatically done when the measurements were input. When the due date was changed to the earlier one, all the little dots went to the middle of the line.
When he puts it as the due date 2 weeks later it shows as the graph I posted.

1st baby = massive worrier!! grin flowers

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now