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

Amnicentesis, yes or no???

19 replies

Bmama · 24/04/2007 18:45

Hi!! I am 36 years and 17 weeks pregnant. I had the blood test and nuchal scan and the risk came as 1 in 2200. I know it is very low but as it is not 100% accurate... I don´t know if having the amnio done or not. Any advice will be much appreciated!!!!

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Jbck · 24/04/2007 19:09

I didn't with my last pregnancy (at 36) & my risk was 1 in 169 which I figured I wouldn't bet on if it was a horse so I wouldn't if I were you. DD had no abnormalities.
If you really need to know I think you'd need to go privately as they won't offer it to you with a score like that, plus would you do anything about it or would it just prepare you. I'm 42 & 12 weeks, deciding whether to go for nuchal & blood or straight to amnio because of my age. I'll need to get Nuchal done privately as they don't offer it at my hospital, which as it's one of the biggest teaching hospitals in Scotland is a disgrace but them's the breaks. Good luck with whatever you decide.

jabberwocky · 24/04/2007 19:11

I did it with both of my pregnancies. I was 38 with the first one and 41 with the second. I just really needed to know. I'm not the type of person who can go with blind faith that things will be OK or that I can handle what comes. I had to have information in hand. Thankfully, mine were both fine.

Good luck with whatever you decide. I know it's not easy.

goingfor3 · 24/04/2007 19:11

Those odds are really good. It's not worth the risk when the odds are negligalble.

mears · 24/04/2007 19:14

Amniocentesis is not without risk. You risk is extremely low but the risk of miscarriage can be 1:200 which is significantly higher. 36 years is not old by the way. Only you can decide what is best for you.

princessmel · 24/04/2007 19:16

Those odds are good. I had one with ds as he was 1 in 100 and like Jabberwocky I needed to know aswell.

ds results came back fine but the wait was awful even though we paid to have them in 2 days instead of 2 weeks. Plus the risk of mc was so hard to accept.

With dd I had a nuchal scan and had very low risk results so didn't have an amnio. I didn't know about nuchal scans when pg with ds.

wildwoman · 24/04/2007 19:17

agree with mears. I wouldn't have it becuase it would hopefully make no difference to me other than stressing me out for the remainder of the pregnancy. I can also see though that not knowing would stress some people out, you have to decide whats right for you.

oxocube · 24/04/2007 19:23

I had one at 35 but I knew I would not have continued with the pregnancy if it showed positive for Downs or Spinabifida. I have a 5 year old son (dc 3) and if I ever became pregnant again at 41 which is very unlikely, I would again have an amnio

SofiaAmes · 24/04/2007 19:26

I think it's a very personal decision and really has more to do with what you would do if you found out from the amnio that you were having a sn child. Do bear in mind that if you are going to seriously worry about it through the whole pregancy that there is quite a bit of evidence now that stress can be harmful to the baby and you need to add that into the calculation of risk of miscarriage and the other factors.

Original poster

Bmama · 24/04/2007 19:27

Thank you all for your advice. It´s sooooo difficult to decide... I definetely don´t want to lose the baby but I don´t want to carry on if there is anything wrong

OP posts:

jabberwocky · 24/04/2007 19:36

I have read somewhere that the risk of miscarriage due to the procedure may actually be even lower than currently reported. I think this was due to the fact that women having amnio are generally in a high risk category anyway and may miscarry for other reasons around the time of the amnio.

I made sure to get a dr. who had lots of experience with them, especially with my second one. She was great and I didn't even have any cramping afterwards (which I did a bit with the first). We elected for the 2 day results - FISH, is what it's called - and it's still stressful. With ds1 I didn't know about FISH and we had to wait about a week. Looking back I don't know how I stood it. Of course, my anxiety over that should be evidence enough that I couldn't have waited 40 weeks to know that everything was fine.

MKG · 24/04/2007 19:42

When my sil was pregnant she came back with a high risk of DS and instead of having an amnio she had a genetic ultrasound which can tell you if there is a risk of Downs or other conditions. If you are worried ask your practitioner if there are any available.

Original poster

Bmama · 24/04/2007 20:23

Thanks MKG. I will do. And thanks everybody for your comments!!

OP posts:

Woooozle100 · 24/04/2007 21:07

Only you can decide what is right for you and your family.

Amnio is the only thing that will tell you for certain if there is any chromosome abnormality. No scan will fully. Often there are 'soft markers' / indications.. often there are no markers.

I had cvs a couple of weeks ago. This was due to the fact I carry a potentially fatal chromosome abnormality. If I had the odds you have been given I certainly would not have bothered. (the whole waiting for the results / worry over miscarriage was agonising - the actual test was OK) Also, most odds given out seem to be for Downs Syndrome and I do not consider this to be the worst thing in the world. I think any pregnancy is a massive leap of faith. Sorry to sound a bit morbid but anything could go wrong at any time - throughout pregnancy / birth, accident / illness in childhood, not to consider all the conditions impossible to detect in pregnancy etc. There is no way to guarantee a healthy 'typical' child. Though obviously if we all worried about this, no one would want to get pregnant at all.

Anyway, like most people have said - its a deeply personal decision. I wish you all the best in whatever you decide

BetsyBoop · 24/04/2007 21:15

I tried to look at the odds in a positive light

If someone said to you at the start of your pregnancy that you had a 2199 in 2200 chance of having a healthy baby, you'd have been happy with that right?

I had a nuchal + bloods with both my pregnancies (DD born at 39, this one due just before I'm 41) I would have considered amnio if my odds had been 1 in 100 or worse - I just couldn't stand the thought that I'd miscarry a healthy child with the amnio. Luckily both times my odds came back fine (1 in 9,600 last time, 1 in 23,000 this time)

that said, only you can decide what is right for your family. It's not an easy choice.

Best of luck

chilledmama · 24/04/2007 21:17

If your risk factor is so low I don't understand why you would risk your pregnancy??

DaphneHarvey · 24/04/2007 21:30

Bmama - you have answered your own question. If you "don't want to carry on if anything is wrong" then you have to have further tests. Because the odds you have been given obviously haven't reassured you enough, otherwise you wouldn't be posting here.

Nuchal fold screening gives you an indication, that's all. With my 2nd child, aged 40 in pg, my risk was 1 in 3 hundred and something. That was OK for me (and he is fine). But I do know a woman, much younger than me, whose nuchal scan showed much lower risk - whose baby was born with Downs.

As others have said, no pregnancy is risk-free, at any stage. If you have to have a definitive answer - then further investigation is your only option.

mears · 24/04/2007 21:51

Amniocentesis will not tell you whether a baby is totally normal though. It will rule out certain conditions.

Even with the most skilled operator, there is still a risk of miscarriage. That needs to be remembered.

Detailed scan may be a better way to go with such a low screening result.

SofiaAmes · 24/04/2007 21:58

The nuchal fold test on its own is not a particularly good risk assessing test for ds; it is better for spina bifida. Combined with the blood tests it is better for ds. As jabberwocky said, there was a recent study that said that in fact the risk is much lower than previously believed for amnio. I had in fact been told this anecdotally by my obgyn here in the usa. I only had the blood tests with my first (i was 36), but with my second I was only given the nuchal fold and no blood tests and although my results were very good (like yours), I decided to go ahead and have an amnio because I was just too worried about it to trust the nuchal fold results. It helped that when I got pregant with my first, we thought it was a fluke (had been told my dh had no sperm) and didn't want to risk an amnio. However, with my second I got pregnant almost immediately after trying and we realized that the doctor was mistaken and dh did in fact have plenty of very active sperm, so we were less worried about the possibility of getting pregant again if something should go wrong.

fishie · 24/04/2007 22:07

i was same age as you and very very worried to the point of irrationality about this during early pg, but in the end just had a triple test, no nuchal no amnio. for me i think it was something to do with generally accepting the pregnancy - had been trying for a long time and felt like it was all too good to be true.

do you have any particular reason to worry about abnormalities?

Flip