Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Pregnancy

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

Original poster

How accurate did you find your growth scans?

17 replies

vfoster · 30/04/2017 13:27

Hi all, just wondering about growth scans and how accurate they are. I've read a lot on here about them not being very accurate so id like to hear all your stories.
I'm 29 weeks with baby number two and baby number one was a (very) surprising 10lb 10 at 40+4 😬
I ended up having an emergency section due to a failed induction so I'm under a consultant who has basically said I'd need another section of the baby's growth was 'abnormal'.
I've had growth scan number one this week and baby is looking to be of a similar size, 90th percentile and about 3 1/2 pounds.
I know I need to wait and see what the other growth scans say but I'm impatient!
Thanks in advance!

OP posts:
AreWeThereYet000 · 30/04/2017 14:38

Not accurate at all, 1st baby - all the way through, baby will be average = 5lb 13oz at 39+6

2nd baby - apparently measuring on the smaller side, estimated to be no bigger than 6 and a half pound if she came at full term = 8lb 11oz baby at 40+4

DuggeeHugs · 30/04/2017 14:41

The estimate for DC was 1oz out, so pretty accurate in my case!

stealthbanana · 30/04/2017 14:43

Extremely accurate in my case - 1oz out (last scan at 37+4, went into labour 37+6).

Original poster
vfoster · 01/05/2017 17:29

Thanks everyone. Guess it could go either way! Only 11 weeks to go!

OP posts:
SarahOoo · 01/05/2017 19:14

We had a routine one (part of Kings College) and they said our baby would be about 8lb or just under if born on time. She was born 4 days after her due date and 7lb 14oz 😊

Serendipity36 · 01/05/2017 22:24

In my previous pregnancy I had regular growth scans and was told the baby was going to be small. I bought lots of tiny baby and first size clothes but when my son was induced at 42 weeks, he was 9lbs 3oz and very long!

My DC2 is 84th percentile at 28 weeks but the hospital have already told me that the scans aren't accurate and baby could slow down growing towards the end so not to worry too much

calimommy · 02/05/2017 05:40

That's an extremely large baby. Although I'd like to avoid a section and have it as the last resort, that's too big for my pelvic floor muscles I'm afraid! My 6.5 & 7.5 pounders did enough damage 😜
If you are happy with the doctor and trust their judgement then feel confident in the advice they give. You don't have to take it, of course, but know that it is the medical opinion. Good luck!

knaffedoff · 02/05/2017 05:59

Baby 2 was called the giant baby and we were referred for a growth scan, estimated weight was 7.5lbs we were offered a planned c section but choose to wait and have a virginal birth. Baby arrived 11 days early at 10lb, delivery wasn't good and how I wish I had had c section :-(

I hope yours is more accurate x

KimKardashiansArse · 02/05/2017 17:19

I had a late scan with DS2 that was right off. They said something like 8lb as an estimated birthweight and he was 10lb 8.5 Shock. Thank God for c-sections.

Doobius · 02/05/2017 17:21

Not accurate for me. Had a scan at 34 weeks with DC1 and told baby would be around 8 lbs. he was 10 lbs 4 oz.

Scan at 36 weeks with DC2 and told 'around 9lbs'. She was 7lbs.

Camomila · 02/05/2017 17:24

Not very, had a growth scan at 34weeks because I was measuring small, got told he'd probably be 6lb...he was 7lb 8oz.

Original poster
vfoster · 02/05/2017 19:36

Oh my goodness, I hope this baby doesn't get even bigger than my last! 🙈 It's on the 90th centile right now....don't think my back will cope with an even bigger one!

OP posts:
junglebookisthebest · 02/05/2017 19:41

Our area does personalised growth charts for subsequent babies based on size of first baby and other factors like age. I had lots of concerns that baby was too small, I looked at the data behind it all and in fact my baby was plotting average for the population but small because the 'stats' said I 'should' be having a gigantic baby. In the end it turns out both babies were 8lb 3 which I understand is slightly above average weight but hardly massive.

junglebookisthebest · 02/05/2017 19:46

The charts said I 'should' have been having a 9-10 lb baby.
I spent a lot of time looking into this and believe that they are a load of rubbish. Sonographer said it can be so hard - in an ideal world it should always be the same sonographer on same piece of equipment with baby lying and presenting themselves in the same direction. So they say you should use the measures loosely in conjuction with other evidence and yet the consultants seemed to treat the measures as absolute. Can you sense that I didn't really have much faith in my consultant...

babynelly2010 · 02/05/2017 21:59

Very accurate. But done later in pregnancy, at week late estimate was that baby would be just over 9 pounds, dd came 9 lb 1 oz. At 40+6

Blondeshavemorefun · 02/05/2017 22:08

due to age, 43 and ivf and first timemum i was consultant led and had scans every 3w

was told having a big baby and each scan sge gaines 4/6ozs and told would be 9/10lbs by 40w

was induced 39/4 and dd was 7.3

totally wrong

OrangeJulius · 02/05/2017 22:15

Had a scan at 38 weeks, sonographer said baby was just under 6lbs. Baby was out at 39 weeks weighing 6lb4oz.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page