Single Umbilical Artery

[sazzav1000]

At the end of my 20 week scan the sonographer told me this was the situation. She said rest of scan looked fine..but i would need extra scans at 28,32,36 weeks.

was left wondering how worried I should be and wondered whether anyone else had experience of this? (a google search made it sound a much more potentially serious problem than she had hinted).

Any reassurance gratefully received.

Thanks

Hey - I was told the same thing at my 20 week scan and had to go back for another scan at 34 weeks.

As long as everything else was fine on the scan I would not worry too much. I think it can cause low fluid levels around the baby but this will be checked each time you go in. I had low fluid with DD and was told that would be induced if did not arrive before due date.

I am now 36+3 and have not had any problems. I just tried to concentrate on the fact that having a extra scan meant I got to see the baby again and have another photo to coo over!

Hope this helps.

I have this. Conflicting literature on the net as usual ranging from it is meaningless to being indicative of some abnormality. Not sure there is anything conclusive though either way.

I think current guidance to sonographers is that it is a 'normal variant' but this is new so hospitals appear to be sticking to their view that it is something to be concerned about. Though they were a bit vague when I asked them about this.

They worry about growth - hence the extra scans.

pinkmonster and fiftitot...

thank you very much for responding. It was just a bit scary being told minimal details...but being given little sense over whether it was anything to worry about.

Obviously i am not pleased to hear others have the same thing...but it is reassuring to know you're not overly concerned.

Good luck and hope all goes well x

I had this with my ds2 but we didn't have it picked up at all in a scan so we had no idea until after he was born. Which in a way was probably a good thing because we didn't have anything to worry about.

However he was also born with a finger missing on his left hand (although you can't really tell, picture in my profile if you're interested) and although the hospital said it was one of those things reading some sites make me think that the single artery was the cause of this.

I'm not saying this to worry you more and i'm sure your sonographer did a thorough check once they picked the umbilical thing up unlike our sonographer who missed that and a missing finger

Ds2 had to have a kidney scan at 6wks old cos it can cause kidney problems but he was fine.

Phoenix- glad to hear your son is well and healthy. I have definitely decided to stop reading random websites...they really just make you paranoid.

That's why i'm glad i didn't know. Pregnancy is worrying enough as it is.

Been there, done that and got the tshirt 6-yr-old daughter, who is absolutely fine.

She was induced after our extra scans showed decreasing fluid and because she wasn't moving much (but I think that's just her attitude to life).

Our doc's advice, in summary, went something like this: 'We've often found this when we looked carefully at children with problems. We never used to look for it in otherwise healthy children, so we're not sure how common it really is. Now we have better scans, we reckon it's around 1% of 'normal' children.'

All the best. I'd go for the extra scans just to keep an eye, but a lack of other signs on the scan is excellent news (and they'd be looking carefully once one thing was spotted).

that makes sense Lancelottie. think i might seek a bit of GP advice as well.
i guess the detail which shows up in scans these days means all sorts of things like this which werent widely known about before are seen much more often.

I had this with my 5yo DS1 (who's fine!). I found mine out at my 12 week scan. As pp have said it is nowadays thought of as a variant of normal. It can be associated with certain abnormalities if it is found in conjunction with other pointers (such as poor 12 week blood test results, other u/s markers). But as a stand alone finding, a SUA is generally just a variant of normal. Altho' they do scan you more regularly just to check up.

I actually did have several markers which were a cause for concern (SUA combined with low-ish fluid at 12 weeks and poor AFP blood test results with high risks for abnormalities) and I did end up having very low fluid at 36+6 weeks and a C-section (but he was also breech...little minx!) - so I guess I was one of the more worrying cases of SUA - but everything was still absolutely fine. Scored highly on his Agpars and perfect in every way (except for his minx-ness which has continued for 5 years!).

I remember asking the consultant how 'high risk' I was considered because of the SUA and low-ish fluid at around 28 weeks and they said it was pretty low high risk - more just needing extra scans and not a significant risk (and that was with the low-ish fluid, which I'm assuming you haven't got - they would've mentioned if you had). And seeing as you've got to the 20 week scan and all looks good on the scan then you're probably in the clear as developmentally all looks good too (as again, otherwise they would've said....they look for kidney/bladder things I think later on - so they'll have checked that all - and at the later scans they can see them functioning usually - them peeing etc.)

Agree - don't read about it. Google can terrify the life out of you.

ok...thanks Zam72 and others...i do feel reassured. Lovely to hear about so many healthy babies.
Will now stop worrying (well will try anyway)