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

Pregnancy

Talk about every stage of pregnancy, from early symptoms to preparing for birth.

Flip

Original poster

Worried about scan results - what can it all mean?

13 replies

emkana · 27/01/2006 10:00

I had my 20 week scan yesterday - well, I'm actually 21 weeks. It left a question mark because the head measurements equalled 22 weeks while the leg measurements equalled 20 weeks. After talking to the consultant and phoning the lab for the results of my screening test for Downs (which was 1 : 490) I was today informed that I should come back for a re-scan in 10 days' time. I'm very worried now . What can it all mean????

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

edodgy · 27/01/2006 10:10

First of all how tall are you and your partner as you could simply have a petite baby as for the head measurement my ds measured 3 weeks ahead on most of his measurements and a week ahead is nothing at all to worry about. To be honest i dont know why theyve worried you like this as 2 weeks either side of your date is usually classed as normal.

MissChief · 27/01/2006 10:13

think it's routine to do followup scan like this. DS1 was almost off the scale for head measurements (but was born fine & is still so 5 yrs on!) and as a result we had a couple of extra scans when I was pg.
Don't worry, honestly, they're just being cautious.

Original poster

emkana · 27/01/2006 10:13

Thank you for answering. Is it normal as well that head and legs differ like that?
Dh and I are both tall, but me and my dd's both have very big heads .

OP posts:

MissChief · 27/01/2006 10:19

don't remember as such head v. legs but certainly with ds1 there was a disparity (as they saw it) on head circ. v.s foetal length. This was simply because he wasn't average, not because anything was wrong. I'm sure you'll be fine, honestly.

munz · 27/01/2006 10:19

When I had my 20 week scan - 20 weeks by their dats only 19 by my dates, the baby's legs measured 20 weeks but head was 21+2 I like u was worried they told me not to worry too much, it seems our baby has been growing big (about 1cm ish) up till 33 weeks, I saw the consultant yesterday and she said he's 'average'

tbh i'd try not too worry too much until the next scan - some of the lady's on our march thread are measuring about 4/5 weeks ahead and they've come back as normal sized buba's.

ooh i'm 5'2 bte and dh is 6'2 so the m/w said that was the reason.

Blu · 27/01/2006 10:24

emkana - was your scan done at a specialist unit or teaching hospital?

I only say this because as well as checking on your baby, they are equally interested in the finest teeniest details of this that and the other because of researc data.

I'm not saying it's not concerning when you seem to have been identified for a non-standard schedule of tests, I know very well that it IS, but do bear in mind that they deal with the teeniest variations of percentages.

Original poster

emkana · 27/01/2006 10:35

I think it's just a "bog standard" hospital, but I'm not sure.

OP posts:

SoupDragon · 27/01/2006 10:38

Dare I say - are your legs the same length as everyone elses? Is your head the same size? Are they all in proportion??

Of course it's worrying when they say things like that at scans (everything seems designed to worry you!!) but the reality is that everyone os different and every baby is different. The "measuring 20 weeks" type thing is an average and the difference in actual measurements can be tiny.

Flamesparrow · 27/01/2006 10:45

The 20 week scan that I had this time had 19 week legs, 20 week head, and a 21 week tummy.... So its just gonna turn out to be a chubby baby with diddy legs.

Last pregnancy showed a baby with small everything, which to them meant I was 4 weeks behind in my date knowledge... what it actually meant was that I had a baby with very little legs (they were the deciding factor), and they have only really grown to average size in the last few months (now 30 months).

They are probably most concerned about the head size - my friend had to have several extra scans because of the baby's head - it turned out that she had (and still has) just got a giant head! It was off the charts when she was born. It looks normal, but hats don't fit etc.

Please try not to worry - we are all different, and I think a lot of scans are more worry than they are worth!!!

(not at you... at scans...)

MissChief · 27/01/2006 10:47

also - you've got a big head so so has yr baby (proved to be case for me anyway..)

munz · 27/01/2006 10:52

ooh also they said to me that the head prob just had a growth spurt and the rest of the body had to catch up. so it's probably nothing. on the plus side you'll get to see your baby again b4 the birth.

Cristina7 · 27/01/2006 10:58

My 3 babies' femur measurements were much lower than the rest. No problems at all. The screening tests for DS had been fine too.

morningpaper · 27/01/2006 11:00

I had a six-week descrepancy at one point

My whole family is short with very large heads though

Your baby may not be a ballerina but I wouldn't worry too much

Flip