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

Very very concerned - femur length at scan...well all his measurements really!!

9 replies

Doublebubblebubble · 20/09/2015 10:03

2 days ago I had pains at the top of my (massive) bump and was asked to go to the day assessment unit. Anyway after trying to get a good reading on the monitors ( baby's hr was way up 190's) his hr came down and another midwife came in and said the reason they were having such difficulties getting a clear reading was because baby was breech!... 2 minutes later I'm rushed round to ultrasound and baby is presenting head down (I knew it but mw was convinced) anyway whilst they were there they measured him and this is what they found.

Hc: 333.0mm
Ac: 333.0mm
Fl: 67.0mm
Est fetal weight 2966g
Heart action present. Presentation cephalic. Amniotic fluid: normal.

I was 37.5 then i am now 38...

I realise that all of these are estimates but is it normal for hc and ac to be the same?? And for fl to be so far behind??

DD 6 is on the shorter side but 6 and a bit cms seems really short....

Anyone else had anything like this.... I'm struggling to understand

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Kickedinthetits · 20/09/2015 10:34

What makes you think there is anything to be worried about? They would have told you if there was.
What do you mean, fl is behind? Did they plot the results in a graph? Do you mean fl is measuring below average while the others are above or were you actually expecting the measurements to be the same?

Junosmum · 20/09/2015 10:35

Were the professionals worried?

The website below, which has charts and things suggests that HC and AC are appropriate for 38 weeks gestation, Femur length is slightly behind, at about 34 weeks gestation but is still with in normal range for 38 weeks. I'm not a medical professional but I am aware that scans are not always that accurate on size of things, and babies do have large heads in comparison to their bodies.

Also, circumferences are bigger than you think- the circumference of a pint glass is bigger than the length of a int glass (get one out your cupboard and measure if you don't believe me). So it seems HUGE but really isn't.

www.baby2see.com/medical/charts.html

MrsWhirling · 20/09/2015 10:39

Were they worried? When I had my scan for my daughter they said it was on the short side. Me & hubby are short. She's 8 now and no problems x

Original poster

Doublebubblebubble · 20/09/2015 10:42

Im just over thinking things again arent i.

on his graphs it looks really odd... The sonographer wasn't worried nor were the drs...its just freaked me out a bit. I've tried that link but for some reason it isn't working on my tablet... Thank you. Got to calm down I think it's all catching up with me that baby is coming soon!! X

OP posts:

Junosmum · 20/09/2015 10:55

Basically the website is just charts, which you can plot against, it basically says your little one if perfectly healthy with those measurements, if slightly on the short side! If the drs weren't worried, then you shouldn't be either. Good luck with the impending arrival!

RockerMummy184 · 20/09/2015 11:40

On all of my growth scans one of my twins measurements have been 40-60th centile, except FL which has always been 5-10th centile.
No one's ever mentioned it being a problem. I just assumed I'll have another really short baby! (I need to buy short legged trousers and DS at 2.5 can still fit into 12-18m jeans!)
Don't worry. If there was a problem it would have been brought up.

Skiptonlass · 20/09/2015 15:31

If they weren't worried I wouldn't worry. We are all different shapes and sizes as adults, and that starts in utero. That's why the charts have ranges on.

0ddsocks · 20/09/2015 16:08

DSs femur lengths were well behind everything on all my scans - drove myself mad googling all kinds of things it could be. There were no other issues with the scans, no markers for anything else. Turns out he's perfectly healthy just a bit short (9th centile at 20 months).

Try not to worry - there is such a large margin of error for these measurements - on ultrasounds a mm here or there can end up with a really varied reading

scarednoob · 20/09/2015 17:02

My baby was brought early because the scans suggested she was massive and her abdomen was off the charts.

She was 7lb4 at 37 weeks, has an average tummy but is much longer all over than the scans said. The mw explained that the scan is dealing in mm's so they really are just a guess.

My advice would be to trust your professionals. It's their job and they do it every single day. If they aren't worried, you aren't. But if you can't stop worrying, you can always get a second opinion at a private scan.

38 weeks... So close! Exciting!!!!!

Flip