31 weeks pregnant and baby is massive!

[Harry2007]

Can anyone offer some advice?

I'm 31 weeks pregnant and under Consultant care due to acute asthma (although the asthma has been great throughout my pegnancy).

I saw a Consultant at 28 weeks and although she wasn't worried about my asthma at all, she did seem slightly concerned about me measuring 32 weeks, so she booked me in for a growth scan.

Scan at 29 weeks showed very large measurements - way above the grey shaded area on the growth graphs. I'm now booked in for glucose tolerance tests and am having scan no.4 a week on Monday.

Has anyone else had any experience of such large measurements - what happened next?

DS was ENORMOUS, and always measured so. Although he was 'only' 9.5lbs when he was born. It was mainly due to gestational diabetes though, which I found out about at about 12 weeks. I controlled it with diet, which slowed him down a bit. He was born with a big head, but don't worry, he looks very normal now.
I hope for you it is just GD and nothing more serious. Good luck!

I did, they though I might have pregnancy diabetes because the baby was very big. I had several scans but every thing was fine my daughter was just 8lb6 though when she was born. Out of curiosity, did you take any pregnacare?

I was big for dates and twice sent for growth scans. The baby was only 6lb 12.5oz. Is it for definite? 4 hours before he was born they were saying he was going to be 7lb 12.

I've had growth scans with all 3 - now on 4th. Also had glucose tol. test with no.3 (I had my 1st 2 uin London and my cons. here in Notts was really suprised they didn't do the gtt in London). anyway I had Ds who was 9lb11 on his due date (induced due to high BP), DD who was 9lb10 anfd DD who was wierdly 8lb4. All the growth scans were pretty accurate in their guesstimates and I knew DD3 was much smaller. The imp. thing was they all had av. size heads which meant delivery wasn't a problem. With DS I was always 3-4wks ahead of dates when measured. try not to worry - big babies are great and my theory is that they sleep better cos they can take more milk at one go and last linger bet. feeds! My friend's was 11lb..

Harry2007 - I had the same thing. Had a scan at about 31 weeks (I think?) and they told me baby was already 5.5 lbs (!). They said they were a little worried baby was going to be v big and so I was scheduled for another scan (and a repeat glucose tolerance test to rule out GD). Sections and everything were mentioned! At the next scan things seemed to have slowed down growth wise (think it was about 34 wks?).

She was only 7.4 born so nowhere near as big as they'd thought! I was scared when they told me baby was going to be massive tbh and did quite a bit of net research and found they often do 'overestimate' weights by scans. Having said that, my community midwife palpated and said the hospital were talking rubbish (apparently palpation can always give a better indication of size later on in pregnancy). I had a few complications hence the later scans but normally they don't even do later scans in pregnancy as they can get it so wrong (weight) on scans at that time.

Sorry not really much advice - as if your consultant did palpate then hmmm - could your dates be out? Hope things have slowed down for your next scan. Please try not to worry

PS - You didn't say if it was your first?

I measured 5cm over my week number throughout the second half of pregnancy (i.e. 29 cm at 24 weeks, 33 cm at 28 weeks, etc.) and had a growth scan at 35 weeks.

Growth scan showed big baby (they predicted he'd be around 10lb 7oz at full term and he arrived a few days early at 10lb 5.5oz -- sometimes growth scans can be right, although they get a bad press and their accuracy is only something like 80% of birth weights accurate to within plus or minus 10%!) and slight polyhydramnios (excess amniotic fluid).

Because of the big baby they kept testing me for gestational diabetes, but my blood sugar levels stubbornly refused to do anything other than behave themselves perfectly . And polyhydramnios can be related to problems with kidneys/digestive system, so they had a good look at those areas on the scan. Again, DS was fine. Polyhydramnios can affect how the birth is managed, though (for example, often means that artificially breaking your waters may be higher-risk than normal) so is worth knowing about.

Some consultants like to induce big babies early, but the research shows that that doesn't actually do anything to reduce the likelihood of complications. In my case they offered me an elective c/s if I wanted but recommended trying spontaneous vaginal delivery, which was my preferred option too. I went into labour naturally - I did eventually end up with an unplanned c/s but DS was both posterior positioned and never engaged. If your baby is anterior and engages before you go into labour your chances of a successful vaginal delivery are good.

Thanks for all the advice - I seem to be able to find plenty of articles on babies that are "small for dates" but nothing for bigger babies.

By the way, this is my first baby and it is the head and the abdominal measurements that are the biggest of the 3.

I'm just worried that if it's not GD, and I'm pretty convinced that it's not, what are the next steps that are taken - do they keep doing growth scans to check/would they recommend cesarean etc. Does anybody actually know what they're measurements wer at about 30 weeks by any chance?

Forgot to mention aswell that the babt's movements are so strong, I can actuall see his head coming out of my belly - is this normal - you can tell it's my first pregnancy!!!!

An active baby is a good sign (although) s/he will soon run out of space. At 32 weeks they estimated my daughter to be 5lb7. I don't know if it helps. I had a assisted delivery (ventouse) but that is only because DD had her head twisted and had trouble coming out. You didn't say, did you take pregnacare? I am curious because all my friends who had massive babies (inlcuding me) and no diabetes did. I think it makes for very healthy and big baby (but don't quote me on that It is my own silly theory)

I didn't take Pregnacare but did take the Sanatogen pro-natal supplement for the first 4 months.

As I said with mine, they didn't recommend c-section. They offered it as an option if I wanted, but recommended trying for a full-term vaginal delivery.

They did recommend not going for an induction if I went over dates (that was because DS never engaged, as well as being big, though). My consultant said that in her experience if you have a suspected big baby who doesn't engage then 80% of the time even if you try to induce you will end up with a c-section anyway, after a long and tiring labour. So her recommendation would have been to have an elective section if I got to 42 weeks, rather than trying an induction (she would still have induced if I wanted, though). As I went into labour at 39+4 the question didn't arise, anyway.

I don't have any measurements from 30 weeks (and since they take your maternity notes away after the birth, I don't have any actual measurements any more) but I know that at every scan I ever had with DS he was right at the top of the scale between 98th and 100th percentile, so I imagine that would have been the same at that point. So if you can find that line on your chart, that will be what he was.

And yes on the movements! I'd get well, I'm not actually sure what bit of him it was (maybe a hand or a foot or an elbow) travelling along from one side of my belly to the other looking like the Loch Ness monster breaking the waves. And you could definitely see the shape of his head when he was in the right position for that. When my mother was pregnant with me I actually kicked the newspaper out of her hands at one point...

Sorry to be naive, but is the 100th centile the very top of the grey shaded area on the graphs?

From me being 28 weeks i measured 4 weeks bigger by fundus height, they sent me for a growth scan at 32 weeks and baby was estimated to weigh THEN 6lb 7oz.

I was booked for an elective section for other reasons so it wasn't really an issue, but ended up have the section @ 38 weeks) went into natural labour) he weighed 9lb 6 oz, so full term would have been around 10lb +.

I had the GT test and was told i didn't have it, yet when ds was born he had very low blood sugar and was very close to having to go into special care unit with a tube in his stomach but thankfully the levels went up so not sure what went on there tbh.

I doubt it -- I'm not sure mine had shaded areas, but if I remember correctly (and admittedly I'm trying to remember back two years) the "hmm, we advise having a good think if you're above this line" line was at the 93rd centile.

I took pregnancy vits throughout.

The vits i took throughout pregnancy was Sanatogen pro-natal supplement, i also took them with my dd (no 1) and she was 8lb 13oz so i do believe there may be something in the vitamin thing.

My three graphs, one for head circumference, one for abdominal circumference and one for length of femur, have the line that shows the "normal" growth of an "average" and then there are shaded areas to either side of this line showing the normal growth for a babay smaller or larger than average.

My baby if way above the top of this shaded area, hence the cause for concern. I'm just afraid that if I have a natural delivery, I'll either tear very badly or end up having an emergency cesarean.

Getting very worried about it now to be honest , but I suppose the tests and scans over the next fortnight will give me more of an idea as to what's happening.

I had a huge DD2 too - ended up 9lbs 10oz but they were predicting 10lbs+ weeks before. She was one big kicking baby from early on and is still a lively child at the age of 3!! I remember the day before I gave birth the mw told me that I was simply enormous but "not to worry" as it was "all baby" - ie not just blubber. Little did she know that I was wishing it was blubber and a smaller babe! Still, they let me try for a homebirth (did transfer as she got in an awkward position pressing on sciatic nerve so needed a transfer). I had her normally and recovered totally from the labour wear and tear. Never mentioned c/s to me and not once was size of the baby mentioned as a possible reason for a c/s.
My sil had even bigger babies, all naturally.
The gestational diabetes tests are ok and nothing to worry about. Better they know and can help you control it. Being gestational, even if you have it, it will go away after the baby is born and need not be a big issue while pregnant either - if managed and diagnosed properly.

Also, big babies don?t necessarily mean large children - my huge baby is more petite now than her big sister was and cousin who were both much smaller birth weight. Her cousin who weighed in at well over 10 lbs is training to be a professional ballet dancer!!

Right -- I strongly suspect then that "above the shaded area" just means "above the 93rd centile". And in that case, seven out of every hundren babies will by definition be above the 93rd centile.

Please don't worry -- you may be able to get back some of your confidence by looking into things like perineal support during the second stage of labour (to help prevent tearing) and optimal foetal positioning (trying to make sure your baby is in an anterior position, which will make the birth much easier). Even if you do wind up needing an emergancy c-section (and I know women who've birthed 13lb babies vaginally with no tearing) it's really not that bad, honestly.

On the plus side, big babies are generally more robust and have better head control. Some people will tell you that they sleep through the night earlier as well, but in my experience that is a big fat lie...

Ask them what centile they think your baby is on when you have the next scan -- that'll give you more information.

Hmmm interesting as I took sanatogen pro natal all the way thru too but as I said DD wasn't big - in fact spot on average at 7.4.

Harry, if you are worried ask to speak to cons - don't be fobbed off. If you feel you would like a planned section (have heard they are much better for recovery than emergency) then ask. I am sure if they think the baby is going to be big then they will allow it. They offered me one (at the time but then later on for different reasons). I had a vaginal delivery though as the thought of a CS scares me - but personal op!

I measured large for dates with both of mine. I had an extra growth scan and was tested for GD twice but thankfully all was OK. I just had big babies - 10lb 13oz and then ds who was 12lb 4oz. Good luck

Try not to worry too much, because growth scans can be very unreliable. I had to have them regularly while expecting the dts, and since my prev was 9lb7 they were expecting biggies. By the end they estimated them both over a 1lb bigger than they actually were. And giving birth to a big baby isn't as bad as you expect neither, I didn't even need stitches with my 9lb7 baby even though I did with my 8 pounder.

Thanks for all your help everyone - I suppose I'll just have to wait and see what size baby pops out, or not, as the case may be!