Advanced search

NT result....1 in 240

(19 Posts)
appletree100 Mon 10-Feb-14 10:32:31

So after much deliberation I/we did the NT scan - I am 32 years old. Firstly I was happy as we had the NT measurement come up as 1.7 which is good. But my bloods have which were plonked on my door mat saturday made the final result as 1:240 - I have cried alot - gutted.

bHCG 2.63 MoM
NT 1.7 MoM
PAPP-A 0.52 MoM

I believe it is the bHCG that is high... I think the normal range is below 2.5... all this combined with my age has given me the 1:240.

Now in the UK the cut off for high risk is 1:150... not the case in other countries, some places its 1:250... which would put me high risk.

My Husband was great, spelled out the stats.. my chances are still below 0.5% and I was relieved when he said 'no more tests'. I don't think we are going to take it further....

I do believe that these tests are a bit dodgy with the high rate of getting it wrong. Our folks didnt have them so I am telling myself that they just don't have the years of results to base all of this on.

I am not really sure what I am asking really I think just if anyone else is going through this scare?

I am more just angry now rather than upset and am thinking screw these result and forget about them. I would have liked 1:1000 result though ;)

Thanks for listening xxxxx

love love love

Roseandmabel Mon 10-Feb-14 10:48:34

Have you looked into the harmony test at the FMC?

I had a similar situation and my adjusted risk was well over 1in100,000 following the harmony - this have me much needed reassurance without going through an invasive test.

snapple21 Mon 10-Feb-14 11:22:52

If you have concerns that are making you so upset please do ring the hospital and ask to talk things over with the screening midwife. They will see you and discuss your anxieties and options in regards to the result regardless on any 'cut off'.

ChicaMomma Mon 10-Feb-14 12:07:09

I had decided that if mine came back lower than 1:1000 i'd go for CVS test (came back 1:64,000 in the end). 1000 was my cutoff. It's such a personal thing though, but if you're worried, get the further testing, then you can draw a line under it. Did they check things like nasal bone, other soft markers?

Showy Mon 10-Feb-14 12:08:46

Mine was 1/156 with dc2. Low risk. I didn't give it a second thought.

WipsGlitter Mon 10-Feb-14 12:13:47

Where I am they don't do a nuchal because it's not a diagnostic test. None of these are. That's why we refused all testing.

appletree100 Mon 10-Feb-14 12:37:10

Showy - I have decided I am with you on this smile

ChicaMomma Mon 10-Feb-14 12:39:35

Good call- draw a line and move on and enjoy the rest of your pregnancy!

Showy Mon 10-Feb-14 12:48:29

Well done you. grin

Enjoy the rest of your pregnancy.

appletree100 Mon 10-Feb-14 13:14:32

Thank you everybody xxxxx

Totesamazeballs Mon 10-Feb-14 13:17:51

I am 32 and have the same risk level. Much higher than with my first baby and the only reason I could see was my PAPPa which was 0.3. I raised it with my midwife and she said not to worry. I do sometimes think about it but just got to hope baby comes out happy and healthy.

AliceinWinterWonderland Mon 10-Feb-14 13:37:37

I was 43 when pregnant with DS2, and ours came back 1:12. The midwife was really pushing further testing. She actually rang me back a couple times pressuring me somewhat. I told her I would be happy with just looking for soft markers on the 20wk scan.

Nothing showed on the scan, and DS2 showed no signs of DS.

appletree100 Mon 10-Feb-14 13:56:12

Happy x

Thanks Totesamazeballs and Wonderland... I like x

I think in todays world we are used to being in total control of everything (I know I am)... Careers, information at the tip of our fingers... From now on I am going to try my best to let pregnancy take its path like every mum and dad has been doing for thousands & thousands of years.... and just hope for the best smile

My nan had 8 healthy children, her last when she was in her 40s... no scans at all back then ;) Tough women 'eigh!

lots of love and luck to all xx

CrispyFB Mon 10-Feb-14 14:11:43

That's categorically low risk by nearly every standard - you really have nothing to worry about smile

Slightly higher bHCG can be caused by IVF or bleeding, or if it's a girl!

I had a 1 in 34 (at 34) and a 1 in 5 (at 37) and neither baby has Down Syndrome.

Armadale Mon 10-Feb-14 14:27:52

Hi Appletree, that sounds like low risk to me smile

I was very conflicted about having the testing and rang the department several times for a chat, and I found them really helpful- they were well informed, listened to me and gave me good advice. I'm not sure if it is the same at every hospital, but if it is still on your mind, I would ring them and have a chat about it with them, I'm sure they could help.

BakingBunty Mon 10-Feb-14 14:53:22

I think that sounds like a really good result. I second suggestions for Harmony or other non-invasive tests if you're still anxious and can afford it.
Personally wouldn't take the risk of invasive testing if the odds of miscarriage as a result of CVS or miscarriage were higher than the odds of having a baby with Downs Syndrome or similar, if you see what I mean - the maths just wouldn't stack up for me. But very personal choice.
Hope you have a beautifully uneventful pregnancy!

Crazeeladee Mon 10-Feb-14 15:11:45

We had exactly the same with dd2, I was 32 and the result was 1:240. I had had the test at about 16 weeks, so some hcg was still there, which raised the result. As you say, it's 0.5% chance of having downs, the risk of miscarriage with an amino is 1%, so we chose not to have that as it was more likely than having a positive downs result. It comes down to how much you need to know, if you wouldn't take action on a positive amino. I felt better after my 20 week scan, when there were no other markers. I know how you feel as we were in the exact same situation, dd didn't have downs, and looking back now, I'm glad we didn't have the amino. If you had got 99.5% in an exam, you would be really pleased, and wouldn't care about the 0.5%, so think of it that you have a 99.5% chance of everything being fine.

Jollyb Mon 10-Feb-14 18:17:26

I was similarly worried with DD2. After being given a 1:13000 risk with DD1, I was given a 1:300 risk with DD2. It took me a good few days to rationalise this and accept that it was a low risk result. She 's fine BTW.

Plateofcrumbs Mon 10-Feb-14 19:16:00

It's a very personal decision and I think it comes down to what you would do with the knowledge that additional testing would give you. I had a 1 in 97 risk + further soft markers and opted to have a CVS.

I was told by hospital that the 1% miscarriage risk generally cited is based on studies carried out in mid-90s and techniques have improved since then. I was lucky that I was in a hospital which has a specialism in fetal screening so I felt in safe hands.

Join the discussion

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

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: