Apparently too far on for Nuchal test, dates make no sense...help!

[EmilieFloge]

I had my '12' week scan this afternoon and I'm really confused now.

the baby was all there, looked ok, but it looked huge and the sonographer said I'm further along than I thought, and much further than I was formally - I thought I was 13+4, the midwife put me at 13+0 today, (from LMP) and the baby was too long for her to get an age on her chart from CRL, though I looked it up and it's actually 14+3 - which according to the other measurements is what the sonographer came up with too, though she said she was meant to go on Head circ alone, which puts me at about 15+3 !

I had an odd CB digital test at what I thought was 1+6 which said 2-3 weeks, so at the start I just dismissed that as having high HCG for some reason.

But if I am really over a week ahead, it literally means I conceived on day 4 of my period when I hadn't had sex for quite a few days, also i was charting and had a positive OPK on day 12 of that cycle.

It just does not add up. But pretty much all the measurements put me at over 14 weeks. I did think, it was the cycle before, but that would make the baby two weeks too small instead, which I think is more unlikely especially as I had a normal period.

So now I am thinking, what could cause a massive head in a baby, or a large baby all round? Medically I mean - they couldn't do the nuchal fold as it's too far on, so I've had the Quadruple blood test instead and I am a bit nervous that something is wrong as the baby is so enormous.

Sorry this is so long - MW phone is off and I've no idea who to ask, because nothing seems to add up.
Thankyou for any thoughts x

This is the link to my chart for April:

Ovulation Chart || Ovulation Tracker here

Sorry, doesn't work...will keep trying.

<a class="break-all" href="//[url=www.fertilityfriend.com/home/23621f]My" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Ovulation Chart[/url] here

Aha!

Have to taken the 2 weeks(ish) off? The x weeks is x weeks since LMP so you are always 2 weeks(ish) less pregnant than the x.

How confusing...and I understand your concerns.

But...I just wanted to say that I conceived twice on day 7...the last day of my period. And I was testng and never had a positive OPK!

Hope you get clarity soon! X

Yes have taken off the 2 weeks...looking at March there's no way I ovulated twice, I don't think, and I'd have t o be measuring two weeks too small to have conceived then.

Plus I was testing obsessively and didn't get a BFP till May 3rd. I think I tested every day from April 21st which is when I ovulated I think! So it's unlikely i was pg then already iyswim.

Day 7 is early that must have been a surprise!

Thanks btw - this scan is meant to be the accurate one isn't it! I dunno...maybe the week or so's grace they allow is what I have to go with, and the baby is just huge.

but why...why would it be so large, my others were normal sized afaik.

I think this is a bit strange, particularly considering your chart. Your temps were still low on days 6 - 10, which really suggests you didn't ov until late on day 10 or day 11. However, if you consider that you thought you were 13+4 and they think 14 +3, it is only a 6 day discrepancy.

With my first pg, I had a similar thing, where they put my EDD a week earlier than LMP did. This would have meant ov-ing on day 7, which whilst I know happens for some folk, didn't to me - we didn't even DTD that day! I am sure I conceived in that pg on day 12 - 14 and I've still no idea why measurements came up so big. Baby was born two weeks over the date the scan gave me, weighing 7lb 14. (He is now belting round the garden playing football)

If that doesn't give you any comfort, can you ask to be re-scanned, or at least book a consultation with someone who can explain the possible reasons behind this?

I think it's just one of those things?? My scan also dated me about 3 days before my OPK/temp change, too... I think maybe scans just aren't as accurate as they'd have you think

*and incidentally, it put me a few days before I had the shag, so it was physically impossible for me to have been updiffed when they say I was.

Thanks so much guys...Lime I hope you are doing ok, I was on the sleigh with you

I am getting it into perspective now - it is only 6 days, but my dates (not LMP - my cycles are weirdly short!) have always been accurate before on the 12 week scan so it was a bit annoying not to be able to have the nuchal fold thing done. I did think of tyring to change the date to more like 12 weeks, when I got the appt, because I knew I'd be over 13 weeks, but thought it would all be fine.

It is a bit odd but then maybe being a third baby it is just large, or maybe I did somehow manage to conceive during that period - though I have no idea how, I hadn't had sex for 8 days!!!

It is very comforting to know that your progeny is well and happy and you were two weeks later than they thought. I hope they don't try and induce me if I go a bit over.
Thanks xx

I wish there was someone to speak to iRL about it but I don't have a consultant and thinking about it, I doubt they will be bothered. It's just simply that my head doesn't fit very well around this sort of thing! I need to see what it means, either that it means there's something wrong, or it means the baby was conceived at an unlikely time, or it means the scan is wrong...iyswim? I can't work out which it is!

Have removed my override from FF and it's put me at day 13 now

Golly...well, I have to conclude that it was an immaculate conception. That's the only way round it.

Very confusing, and I'm in a similar situation - according to my dating scan I conceived on CD3, when I hadn't had sex for two weeks, and wouldn't for another week I also had the same issue with DS1, where my due date got moved forward 2 weeks by the dating scan.

However, the positive OPK could actually have been a positive pregnancy test - the hormones the OPK test checks for is almost identical to HCG and can result in a positive, when it's actually HCG it's picking up. I also know when I first tested (about CD14 - something didn't feel right and I have a very short cycle) I got a very faint line, which I then obsessively tested day after day and it got darker and darker.

Hope the mystery is solved for you.

Gosh, Duchess - that is really odd especially as you got a positive around ovulation, my positive wasn;t till about ?10 days after I ovulated, or thought I did iyswim. I got neg after neg until then. Mind you I was using internet cheapy tests which were a bit rubbish!

I just got hold of the other MW who was great and said, no, it's unlikely the baby has anything wrong with it - they would have seen other signs at the scan, like the proportions wouldn't have matched or something. She said it is far more likely I just conceived at an impossible time of the month!

But if I was pg a week earlier - why didn't I get a positive result when I tested from ovulation onwards. That doesn't make any sense.

I think the baby is just inordinately big.

I hope you find out what is going on with yours soon - are you seeing anyone else or just waiting till the next scan?

as for being too late for the nucal - did they offer you the quadruple test at 16 weeks? it is just a blood test but detects the same things although slightly less accurate I think. I had this as baby wouldn't move into the right position to get the back of the neck measurement x

It is really weird, although I have a very short cycle (22 days), and usually ovulate around CD10, so a positive on CD14 wasn't completely insane. But I keep coming back to...I know when I had sex and there is no way I could be pregnant with those dates, whereas my LMP dates and first scan make perfect sense. All very confusing.

I mentioned it to my midwife at my 16 week scan, she didn't really say much, but marked on my notes 'Mother sceptical of dates and is certain of LMP' which I'm sure will be ignored. I've got my 20 week scan in 2 weeks time, so I guess we'll see how that goes.

I'm very slightly worried, just because I'll be having an ELCS this time, which is usually early than 40w anyway, and I want to make sure it's not too early, IYSWIM?

If I remember correctly, scan dates can actually be 2 weeks out in either direction, someone did a study on IVF mums and it turned out they really aren't as good as they seem. I'm not sure what that means in terms of your tests, but it is certainly something to consider if you go "overdue" as you could be encouraged to be induced before "42" weeks when actually you aren't 40 weeks yet. In this situation you can always ask for expectant monitoring on the grounds that you don't agree with their dates, and not accept induction as long as the baby is healthy and happy.

Incidentally, in my first pregnancy I did ov tests, and this one was concieved at the only opportunity that cycle, after a m/c, both times my scan date has suggested I conceived 3 days before the earliest opportunity (i.e. ovulation day, or the first time I had sex post m/c)

Thanks guys, sorry, had to go and do supper so ds took over the computer!

Fairimum - they already did the quad test today, hope it isn't too early - I've read how inaccurate it can be which bothers me.
But I guess it's better than nothing.

Perhaps it is just inaccurate scanning though everything was in proportion, she said - the measurements mostly match up.

Duchess, that is a concern, I can see how it could be awkward to explain when the time comes. I hope you get more clarity at your 20 week. Let me know?

nannyogg - thankyou that is really helpful to know I can challenge the dates.
Though I am starting to think they must be right somehow and maybe a random egg got released at an odd time, or something...anyway will also have to wait another 5 weeks to check at 20 weeks.

Hopefully that might either agree or disagree with this!

Thanks so much everyone x

I honestly wouldn't be worried at the moment. According to my ff chart for ds I was due 23rd November, the due date they gave me at my 14w scan was 9th November, so that's almost 2 weeks ahead of where he should have been. He also had a large head and short thigh bone on my 20w scan. He was born a perfectly healthy 7lb 13oz on 13th November with a perfectly normal sized head.

My ds was ivf so we knew pretty much to the hour exactly when he was conceived/ created but the sonographer still changed my due date I think they just make it up

Emilie, I thought it might be you, but I wasn't 100% sure of the namechange. Good to hear from you, anyway. I still miss the sleigh!
I talked to Spring on a thread recently and she had a clear 12 wk scan despite the bleeding, so wonderful news. Maybe you've seen her around anyway.

Back to the issue, I was induced earlier than I thought I should have been, due to incorrect dates. It wasn't pleasant but tbh by then I was just desperate to hold my baby! Duchess I can see why this would worry you re. a CS, worth questioning repeatedly I think. Hope it goes well for you.

SlimJim

They probably do just make it up

Roger, that is very reassuring - thankyou. And Limey, I'm so glad to hear about Spring as I hadn't seen her. Have you folks got a new thread going? I might check in if so.