# Fluid around baby



## BlueIrises (Jul 23, 2006)

My SIL had a m/c about 2+ years ago...I don't know the full details of the situation at the time but I know she had hypermesis and lost the baby I think somewhere around 12w. She got PG 6m later and had a healthy baby boy who is now almost 18m. She is about 14w PG and had the nuchal translucency screening a week and a half ago and here is what she wrote me today in an email...

we have had a difficult rollercoster time this past week and a half/two weeks. our nuchal ultrasound was heartbreaking- we found out there was a substantial amount of fluid around our baby- i knew it within the first few moments- since our first baby had the same situation (and a lot of other problems), i could see it immediately- the u/s itself was very quick- our first was over two hours, O's was at least 15-20 minutes, and this one was maybe 7-8 minutes. the u/s tech was so upset and she just shut everything down and said how she knew our history and was so sorry and practically ran out to get the doctor- and the doctor came in and said she didn't even need to check for herself, the photos were obvious- and we were just so devastated and shocked- i had a cvs done last week and then the genetic counselor called with the fish/fast (for chromosomal abnormalities) results on friday and said they came back negative and that we could be cautiously optimistic, and we will know the full test results hopefully by this upcoming friday. so when i asked why our baby would have so much fluid build-up if it wasn't chromosomal, she said it could be congenital heart or other defects. so i'm not sure what exactly i'm supposed to be cautiously optimistic about.

Anyone familiar with something like this...is there hope? Have you heard of a positive outcome for fluid around a baby?


----------



## leobabe (Dec 29, 2007)

the only thing i can offer is my own experience which is not the same, but i can only relate about the amount of stress i was under.
with my son we had the nuchal translucency test done, and his was measuring in the 98th percentile indicating possible defects.
i can tell you that this was one of the hardest times of my life.
i'm so sorry your sil has to go through this. it is excrutiatingly painful to not know if your baby is going to be ok.
i would give her as much support as possible right now. ask her what she needs.


----------



## BlissfullyLoving (May 4, 2006)

I have done quite a bit of research on nuchal translucency. I suggest using google scholar to look up efficacy and reliability of the test. Here is some stuff that I found doing a quick search: It is most reliable between 11-14 weeks and even then the accuracy is not astounding. (An important point to remember is that increased NT thickness per se does not constitute a fetal abnormality. 90% of pregnancies with fetal nuchal translucency below 4.5mm result in healthy live births. About 80% of pregnancies with NT of 4.5-6.4mm and 45% with NT of 6.5mm or more result in healthy live births.http://www.genecare.com/1stTriScrPT.html). Even in those weeks the measurement is highly variable, and completely contingent on the technician. One study wrote, "The drawbacks of this method are inter- and intra-observer variability, and its inefficiency. In particular, accurate caliper placement requires highly skilled operators since the border of the nuchal translucency layer is very thin." (Automated Ultrasonic Measurement of Fetal Nuchal Translucency Using Dynamic Programming) and "Until recently, the test was only performed at major medical centers, although it's becoming more widely available. Doctors have to be thoroughly trained to ensure accuracy because it's such a tiny measurement. Nuchal translucency screening should only be done when it is combined with a blood test. " (http://www.revolutionhealth.com/heal...enatal-testing). The screening is only recommended for people with high maternal beta serum results.

I hope everything works out for your friend.


----------



## Sioko (Feb 3, 2007)

The first thing I thought when I started reading your post was "Fluid around the baby? Great!" But that's cause I also had hyperemesis gravidarum with my first preg. and that resulted in IUGR and low fluid levels that scared the ****** outta me because they were so worried about her lungs... So after that I always thought the more fluid the better...

With a little googling I see that's not always the case.

I pray everything works out just right for your friend


----------



## savithny (Oct 23, 2005)

The fluid around the baby issue is _unrelated_ to the NT scan - what this means is that during what was to be a routine NT scan, they realized there was some kind of anomaly. Of course there is supposed to be fluid around baby - and that amount can vary quite a bit, but in early pregnancy, a very large amount is not usual.

What that means, only time will tell. But it often can be a sign of various chromosomal anomalies -- many of them fatal









I'm so sorry this is happening in your family.


----------

