Talk

Advanced search

would you have amnio if nuchal was 1:27000

(69 Posts)
beeny Tue 07-Oct-08 15:57:01

I am 38 and have one ds who is two.I just wanted some advice

10krunner Tue 07-Oct-08 15:58:12

why would you? They are brilliant odds. Mine was 1:26. Relax and enjoy the rest of your pregnancy.

mumblechum Tue 07-Oct-08 15:58:28

What does your obstetrician recommend?

Would have thought that as the risk of miscarriage is 1:100 you shouldn't have the amnio.

NatalieJaneIsPregnantAgain Tue 07-Oct-08 15:58:38

1:27000 shock think mine was 1:1300 and I didn't even think about an amnio.

Me, personally, no.

mehgalegs Tue 07-Oct-08 15:58:49

No

Aliensloveunderpants Tue 07-Oct-08 15:59:17

No, as others have said why would you?

Flamebat Tue 07-Oct-08 15:59:58

No.

I probably wouldn't have the amnio anyway though

beeny Tue 07-Oct-08 16:00:08

Thanks i think i just find pregnancy very difficult and dont relax.

JodieG1 Tue 07-Oct-08 16:00:19

No I wouldn't. The odds of losing the baby after an amnio are much higher than the odds you gave from your nuchal.

Wags Tue 07-Oct-08 16:00:38

Personally no, but its not about what anyone else does but want you want to do. I was 41 and mine was 1:74. I did have a CVS. What you need to find out is the risk of miscarriage from having an amnio. You will find that the chance of having a miscarriage is far, far higher than there being any chance of the baby having problems. I would guess that the hospital may think its odd to go ahead with more tests when the risk is so low but again its your choice I guess.

billysitch Tue 07-Oct-08 16:01:29

NEVER WOULD

billysitch Tue 07-Oct-08 16:02:24

Your decision tho', sorry meant to add that last time.

beeny Tue 07-Oct-08 16:03:47

Again thanks everyone i need to relax.

detoxdiva Tue 07-Oct-08 16:04:14

No!

Mine were 1:12000 and was told that's about as good as it gets, so yours are fabulous odds.

It wouldn't even enter my head to test more after odds like that - relax and enjoy your pg smile

KerryMumchingOnEyeballs Tue 07-Oct-08 16:05:22

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bikerunski Tue 07-Oct-08 16:05:46

Agree with mumblechum. I am 37,risk from triple test was 1:10000. Didn't give amnio a second thought. ds (a month today) is fine.

beeny Tue 07-Oct-08 16:07:01

Kerry do you think you should have had amnios to make pregnancy easier

belgo Tue 07-Oct-08 16:08:24

I don't see why an amnio would make you feel better in this case, as someone else has said, there is a far higher risk from the amnio itself then from odds of 1:27000

No1GruffaloHunter Tue 07-Oct-08 16:10:57

I think having an Amnio would worry me far more...1% + chance of miscarriage (BTW I'm 39 and my odds were 1 in 883 with this pregnancy).

Life isn't certain and even if you ruled out what could be tested for there are many things that can't be picked up... I hate being out of control but thats pregnancy and motherhood.

KerryMumchingOnEyeballs Tue 07-Oct-08 16:11:28

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CoteDAzur Tue 07-Oct-08 16:11:53

The result of a nuchal test is in millimeters, not in 1/10000s, and is not a function of anything else (i.e. not something to be adjusted wrt blood test results) and hence should have a risk assessment in and of itself.

At age 38, personally I would have the amnio no matter what blood tests say.

RibenaBerry Tue 07-Oct-08 16:20:41

Would it help to visualise what one in 27,000 actually looks like? It means that, if every seat in Wembley Stadium (90,000 seats) had a baby sitting in it, your risk means that roughly three of them would have Downs.

On the other hand, if the mother had an amnio for each one of those babies, roughly 900 of them would have been lost to miscarriage.

I am not trying to knock having the amnio test. It is most definitely the best thing for some people. However, I also feel that those big abstract statistics don't always help you to process the numbers.

Does that help at all?

CoteDAzur Tue 07-Oct-08 16:21:52

Check with your hospital how many miscarriages they have had after amnio over the years. It doesn't have to conform to the 0.5% figure of 30 years ago, nor the "1%" figure routinely quoted on MN but is far from reality.

When I was pregnant with DD, I found out that in the ten years since this same doctor has been doing amnios there, he has had only one miscarriage and that was a 42 year old woman with other problems in pregnancy. That was 3 years ago and when I asked again recently (6 weeks pregnant these days) I found out that there hasn't been another miscarriage since.

A recent study, led by Keith Eddleman, MD, of
New York's Mt. Sinai School of Medicine, and published in the November issue of Obstetrics & Gynecology, sought to determine if amniocentesis still has the 0.5% miscarriage rate (one in 200 pregnancies) that it did 30 years ago, when the last significant research was done. Dr. Eddleman offered amniocentesis to 35,000 pregnant women; 3,000 women opted to have it performed and the outcome was the same for both those who had the test and those who didn't -- about 1% of the women in both groups miscarried.

In this study the amniocentesis-related miscarriage rate was 0.06%, or one in 1,600 pregnancies -- significantly lower than the 0.5% rate that came out of studies performed in the 1970s. Since then, there have been many innovations in amniocentesis safety, the most significant being the use of ultrasound technology during the procedure - doctors are able to view the baby and therefore determine where to insert the needle.

From here

CS7 Tue 07-Oct-08 16:45:01

Absolutely not.

jujumaman Tue 07-Oct-08 16:51:56

Certainly not
Those are excellent odds
Amnios are not 100 per cent reliable in any case

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