Talk

Advanced search

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

33+5, slowed growth

(8 Posts)
9DonkeysAndABoy Wed 27-Jul-11 21:04:20

Hi, I have just been scanned for a different reason, but they have found that the baby's growth has slowed down. He is currently 2050g. They have sent me for blood tests and want to rescan me in 2 weeks to see how the baby is growing. Has anyone had this? I am very worried.

haribofan Wed 27-Jul-11 21:41:57

Hi, how often are you being scanned? Has there been concern about your baby's weight before in the pregnancy. I'm not an expert but your baby's weight sounds fine to me. My DS1 was diagnosed with IUGR (growth restriction) when I was exactly your gestation. At 34 wks he was 3lb and was born at 38 wks weighing 4lb 15oz. He was fine, just a bit jaundiced and sleepy to begin with.

MissMarjoribanks Wed 27-Jul-11 21:45:54

The weight seems fine to me too. DS was born at 33+4 and he weighed just over 2kg. The nurses in SCBU kept telling me he was a great size for 33 weeks and he'd have been a 10lber if he'd gone to term.

I would try and get to the bottom of why they think the weight is of concern.

lolajane2009 Thu 28-Jul-11 01:24:11

I have this. I measured stable on my fundal height at my midwife appointment and was sent for a scan on friday at 32 weeks pregnant and baby is just above the tenth percentile and has a EFW of 1532g. Gotta get remeausred next thursday but I'll be guessing my genes play a part as I am only 5ft 2 with small bone structure.

9DonkeysAndABoy Thu 28-Jul-11 09:10:13

Thank you for your replies. I was getting scanned quite often, last time three weeks ago, due to a fibroid, which is not seen as a problem as such, but we had to determine where it would be at birth and if vaginal birth would be possible. Good news is that it is.

But they always routinely check baby's growth, which so far has been ok. Yesterday, however, they found 'decreased growth velocity'. So, you are all right, the actual weight is not so much the problem as the baby growing slower than it used to. No one mentioned the cord to me, they just said the pressure in the cord was good, but I can see from the report that the numbers are a lot lower than last time, just within the normal limits, whereas it was average last time. But it does not seem to worry them. Like I said, they have sent me for blood tests including thyroid and glucose. They are also sending me to a cardiologist, as I had palpitations, although I have explained that palpitations are normal for me, baby or not (this has been checked years ago). So I think the checks are full on. Baby is wriggly, by the way.

Sorry, I am pouring my heart out here, just feels good to talk blush.

Haribofan, Miss I am glad your DCs are fine. Do you know what the reason for growth restriction was, Haribo?

Lola, I guess we are both getting remeasured. I suppose they want to follow the growth. And I think you have a point about the genes, but in our case, we are both BIG people. Big bones, tall, the whole shabang. Most of the people in our family are, apart from the baby's uncle! Although my MIL says DH was 7 lb at birth, which is ok, but almost unbelievable when you see him now. Tall and big!

Anyway, thanks for replies and listening. I will be on edge till the next scan.

AnnamariaHun Mon 01-Aug-11 21:23:03

HI 9DonkeysAndABoy. I really don't think you should be worried about the weight. Just to tell you my story. im expecting ds2 and my mw at 32 wks measured me 34 cm and she said that was very big. so lwhen ast week at 34 wk she measured me the same 34 cm , then she said it's very strange that he'd not grown so she sent me for a scan which then measured my baby to be on the smaller side, around the same weight as urs, but the doctor wasn't very worried about it and will go back for another scan this week.
Exactly the same thing happended with ds1.mw thought he was big, then sent me for a scan where they told me that he was very small (and this was a week before he was due) then he was born with a perfectly normal weight of 7 15lb. so not only the mw's measurments are not wright but the ultrasound gets it wrong as well. I keep thinking to myself that even if he was born now, he would be ok just above 2kg. there are a lot more babies born a lot smaller.
Good luck and try not to worrry

otchayaniye Mon 01-Aug-11 22:20:45

Yes, I had this at 28 weeks. Was being seen by blood pressure consultants anyway, due to preeclampsia with my first.

Growth had been along the 50th centile then dropped to 25-ish. Had to be scanned every 2 weeks. Growth leveled there and has continued on that line, as it happens the line that my daughter was on (born at 36 weeks at 2.5kg) and the one I'd be on as an adult.

I had a horrible few weeks thinking my placenta was knackered at so early on in the pregnancy and was preparing for an early labour. Even continued bfeeding my 2-1/2 year old so there'd be milk in if I had to give birth and baby couldn't suckle.

Was scanned and checked today and baby at 37 weeks is 2.6 kg (although position makes it hard to be certain and they think it may be more) and am booked for section in two weeks. Haven't had preeclampsia return or placental degradation.

Were your scans all done on the same machine by the same person?

Very best of luck, if you are being scanned and followed up you'll be in good hands. It's the first timers that fall through the scanning cracks that can have problems.

lolajane2009 Thu 04-Aug-11 20:13:18

I got rescanned and he was still small today and is now over 2kg. They arent worried as he is growing but just small but healthy.

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