Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Childbirth

Share experiences and get support around labour, birth and recovery.

Flip

Original poster

Large baby the cause of failure to progress?

19 replies

beansprout · 22/09/2007 19:58

Ds was a 10lb 5oz baby delivered by emergency c-section due to failure to progress. I got to 6cm, he was distressed (meconium in the waters, heart kept stopping).

Am 21w preg and yesterday a Dr explained that ds's ginormous head (99th centile) may have got stuck in my pelvis as he was trying to enter the birth canal at a less than ideal angle (he was back to back) and that the lack of pressure on the cervix meant that it stopped dilating.

Has anyone heard of this before, as I hadn't.

And yes, I know loads of 18lb babies have been delivered vaginally!!

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Bluestocking · 22/09/2007 20:08

I was in early labour for a week (how lovely that was) with DS who was back-to-back and four kilos - that's 8lb 13oz so not massive but I am only little myself. I have always suspected that it was his dimensions and less-than-optimal positioning that made the whole thing so slow but I don't of course know for sure.

unknownrebelbang · 22/09/2007 20:09

I don't know ANY 18lb babies, lol.

tori32 · 22/09/2007 20:12

beansprout This type of thing happened to me. My dd was 9lb 12oz and was also back to back or head deflexed (face pointing up instead of down on way out) It is a bad angle. I got to 9cm after 33hrs and stopped, followed by c-section as well.

Don't panic though, the failing to progress is because with the head at that angle the head doesn't engage properly and there is not enough pressure put on the cervix to cause dilataion. Did your waters break or did someone break them?

It possibly won't happen again because the positioning depends mostly on the baby and if its head face down then it should be fine. (I have been told this by my MW because I wanted to know if I should be able to labour normally as am now 14wks pg again.

ChristmasPud · 22/09/2007 20:14

Surely the largest baby born was 14lb or so as in news this year?

Original poster

beansprout · 22/09/2007 20:17

I confess that I made up the 18lb baby.

Tori - that's really interesting and sounds v similar. I am 21 weeks, hence the discussion. They want to monitor the growth of this baby and have said that if it is big, they will recommend a c-section again.
My waters did break, following the second pessary. I assume that's a good thing?

Bluestocking - a week of early labour. Respect!

OP posts:

ChristmasPud · 22/09/2007 20:18

tori = that's an interesting explanatiuon. As my midwife said 'some people are less sensitive to the hormones' when I asked why my labour did not progress. Made me feel like it was because my body was inherantly wrong amf useless.

tori32 · 22/09/2007 20:28

christmaspud how awful, sometimes the hormone levels affect the strength of contractions which is why they use an oxytocin drip to speed them up, but being faced the wrong way is a bit like, you can only easily bring a sofa through a doorway one way. You can squeeze it through another way, but it will be a struggle and would take longer IYSWIM

Original poster

beansprout · 22/09/2007 20:31

I have spent 3 years thinking my body is crap and can't deliver babies and now I can see that I was just unlucky.

Amazing. And not before time too!

Think that on this basis, I have to go for the VBAC, even though they seem to be offering me an elective at every turn.

OP posts:

Klaw · 22/09/2007 20:31

Beansprout, ds may have been a big baby but that was not the reason you had emCS. The reason you had a CS was because he was OP and I'm guessing because the range of augmentations procedures did little to help and more to hinder.

So, can you tell us more about the labour?

Look into OFP as initially what you describe is classic for emCS and I suspect that interventions may have led to hindrance of you birthing a nice big baby.

also look at Caesarean Myths Exploded as it's rare that a woman grows a baby too big to birth. You may want to check out an Osteopath to ensure your pelvis is in good shape. Also remember that the baby's head bones are not fused in order that they may overlap and so reduce head size while being born. Good OFP will support a normal birth and knowledge of birthing positions will enable you to birth a baby who is still not ideally positioned. I'd recommend Jean Sutton's books if you wish to go down the self-help route for this baby. Jean Sutton explains very nicely how an OP baby doesn't put the correct pressure on cervix to dilate. And that a BIG baby in a good position will be great in encouraging cervix to dilate!

HTH

MadLabOwner · 22/09/2007 20:32

Tori - that is the best description of the importance of the baby's position during labour I have ever read! Very funny and apt!

lulumama · 22/09/2007 20:33

sounds like the position rather than the size of the baby was a hindrance

you could look at optimal foetal positioning and the www.spinningbabies.com site for tips on getting baby into a better position for birth.

it does sound like it was more bad luck than anything else, as things were progressing , the change in flexion of the head could therefore stop dilation and make further descent impossible

christmaspud.. your body is not inherently wrong, your MW should not have said that.. some women take longer to progress, and can need help , there are a myriad of reasons why a labour can stop progressing or be slow to progress, none of which are your fault

lulumama · 22/09/2007 20:34

beansprout.. if you need any other support, you know how to reach me

tori32 · 22/09/2007 20:35

Glad I have been of help for once!

Original poster

beansprout · 22/09/2007 20:36

I spent hours on my hands and knees trying to get ds into ofp but am convinced more than ever that this is vital so it will be out with the birthing ball in a few weeks!!

Thanks for your v helpful posts Klaw and Lulumama.

OP posts:

Original poster

beansprout · 22/09/2007 20:36

Thanks Lulumama, I appreciate that.

OP posts:

lulumama · 22/09/2007 20:37

no worries sweets, that is what i am here for !

Susianna · 22/09/2007 20:37

Yes! I had mine 14 weeks ago, and he was back to back as well (OP is the term they used, Occipitus Posterior).

I was pushing for about half an hour-45 mins, and the mw said it would have been much quicker, prob about 15 mins had he been in the right position, ie not a little stargazer!

It is to do with pressure exerted (as Lulu says)on the most useful part of the cervix, which an unflexed head doesn't really do.

They also said had it been my first baby, there's every chance he would have actually got stuck and I'd have had to go to hospital. But luckily I had been pre-stretched

He was only 8lb9 so I don't think the size is hugely relevant though probably was partly to blame.

Hope that helps.

Susianna · 22/09/2007 20:39

Btw he was in the ROA position when labour began, 3 hrs later he was turning round and had only got to OP, so that was how he came out! Little so and so!

wb · 23/09/2007 09:30

Ds1 was back to back - labour took forever due to poor/uneven dilation. Luckily he wasn't as big as your ds (but at 8lb 10oz was plenty big enough ). Forceps got him out.

With ds2 due in a few months I have also been worrying about a repeat performance but my midwife has said pretty much the same as your consultant - no reason to think that it'll happen again.

I am spending a lot of time on all fours though, to try and avoid a second back to back delivery!

Flip