fundal measurement

Discussion in 'Second Trimester' started by -, Jun 4, 2005.

  1. Guest

    last week i went to my consultant appointment, and when they measured my fundal height he was shocked thats it was 27cm, i was only 23 weeks so i should of measured 23cm roughly, any one else measuring different, could i be further into the pregnancy than i first expected, how accurate are scans, as i was still having periods 3 months into pregnancy so i cant go by the dates of them.

    im not too worried, just dont want the shock of baby coming early lol

    :?
     
  2. Layla

    Layla Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2005
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    scans are pretty accurate i think, maybe you have a big baby?
     
  3. Guest

    thats what i was thinking, but the obstetrician kept checxking the measurement and kept checking my notes, made me feel worried, but i talked to midwife and she says its too early too know what it could be, i have to wait to im 28 weeks and do another measurment, just wondering if any one else had this same situation.
     
  4. Layla

    Layla Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2005
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    i mesured very big on my son, the hospital called me in for an extra scan when i was 33 weeks coz they thought going by my size, i must have twins and they didnt pick it up before.

    when i got scanned, they confermed it was only one, but told me he was going to be a 9 to 10lb baby, and that i was carrying hardly any water.

    this terrifed me! i didnt want to give birth to a 9 or 10lb baby lol

    when i went in to labour, i found i was full of water, with every contraction, i was loseing a pint of water, even the midwifes were amazed.
    my son was only 7lbs 7.

    so scrap what i said eailrer about scans being right, coz thinking about it, they were wrong about my son
     
  5. Guest

    god that must have been terryifying. 10 lb baby,
     
  6. AmberNicole

    AmberNicole Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Messages:
    840
    Likes Received:
    0
    Fundal height isn't all that accurate in determining the size of the baby. It can change from time to time, just from the position the baby is in. I've always measured 1-2cm smaller and I've been told and read that it's not really a concern until it's more than a 4cm difference. Ultrasounds can be a little off as well when determining the size of the baby.
     
  7. littlebump

    littlebump Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,533
    Likes Received:
    0
    Very true. My sister in law had gestational diabetes and she was huge - they were going to induce her at 38 weeks because they didn't want the baby to get any bigger, they had estimated it to be around 8.5 - 9 lbs. However she went into labour the day before she was due to go in to be induced and the baby was just over 7 lb! Must have been all fluid!
     
  8. littlebump

    littlebump Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,533
    Likes Received:
    0
    Incidentally, I read somewhere that all babies grow at very similar rates for the first 12 weeks, so if you are lucky enough to have a scan at or before 12 weeks, then the dating of the baby is very accurate.

    After this time, the growth varies considerably from pregnancy to pregnancy and therefore later scans are less accurate in terms of dating the pregnancy. Did you get scanned early on?
     
  9. Guest

    thats what i read, and i did not find out i was pregnant until i was 19/20 weeks and did not have a scan until 21 weeks, so i think they can be that accurate with when the baby is due. now im measuring 4 cm bigger then i should be, so im wondering if they are a bit out with my dates
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice