# Gastroschisis - vaginal birth?



## minkajane (Jun 5, 2005)

I'm watching _Babies: Special Delivery_ (I should know better, I know). There is a woman who has been induced six weeks early because the baby has gastroscisis, where the intestines are outside the body. I understand why they would want the baby to be born early, but I thought all babies with gastroscisis were born via C-section. I always thought this was to prevent the intestines from being squished or tugged in any way during the birth. I don't understand why this woman is birthing vaginally.

Anyone have any info on this condition that could shed some light on this?


----------



## queenjulie (Oct 26, 2007)

I have no idea, but I saw the episode too and was totally astounded. I cannot believe they didn't do a completely sterile c-section to lower the risk of infection, not to mention, you know, TEARING THE INTESTINES OFF during birth. I thought it was totally bizarre.


----------



## MamaHen2J&J (May 23, 2007)

Interesting! I've never heard of them opting for a vaginal! Perhaps they felt the baby was small enough?? WEIRD!


----------



## vloky (Apr 29, 2006)

I don't know but I was born with it, I was delivered via c-section due to my heart rate and I was in distress, they thought it was my umbillical cord wrapped around my neck and found a little surprise. My cousin also had a baby with it, they had no clue and she birthed vaginally, no tearing of intestines, full term, although her daughter was in the hospital for some time. I think it might depend on the severity of it though. A c-section at near full term would sound more sterile and less risky then inducing 6 weeks early though, but every medical case is different.


----------



## vloky (Apr 29, 2006)

and I think it'd be quite hard to tear the intestines off, they are pretty tough. Do umbillical cords tear off?


----------



## happyhippiemama (Apr 1, 2004)

My daughter was born with gastroschisis. Everything from her espophogus to her upper rectum (that would be... uh... _everything_







) developed outside of her body.

I birthed vaginally and naturally, with no interventions whatsoever.

There is absolutely no statistical evidence showing that gastro babies born via c-section fare any better than gastro babies born vaginally. None. Zero.

The organs just squeeze out of the birth canal. It's really not that big of a deal, normally. I mean, once the head and shoulders are out, the rest of the baby just oozes on out anyway, yk?

During our regular ultrasounds, you could see DD's intestines floating around in the amniotic fluid - DD would bat them around with her hands.









I am surprised that they induced the mama, though. Gastro babies tend to arrive on their own between 32 and 36 weeks. My DD cooked to 37 weeks and was relatively fine. The longer they cook, the more damage can potentially be done to the exposed intestines. The amniotic fluid reacts to the intestines and thickens the tissue, which can lead to bowel difficulties.

DD's innards were mal-rotated from floating around in the womb, and they didn't try to rotate anything back because it could've caused even more trauma. So her appendix, for example, is in the upper left part of her abdomen instead of the lower right.


----------



## vloky (Apr 29, 2006)

hhm, yeh on a test i had done my intestines are pretty much mirrored of how "normal" peoples are. I was actually over 2 weeks late though..


----------



## BugMacGee (Aug 18, 2006)

I have take care of many gastroschesis babies. Most delivered vaginally (unless they were in distress and the situation warranted). I think there is more danger of the intestine getting nicked with a c/s than it shearing off in a vag delivery.
Now omphaloceles, where the viscera are encased in Wharton's jelly, are sometimes delivered by c/s for whatever reason.


----------



## happyhippiemama (Apr 1, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BugMacGee* 
I have take care of many gastroschesis babies. Most delivered vaginally (unless they were in distress and the situation warranted). I think there is more danger of the intestine getting nicked with a c/s than it shearing off in a vag delivery.
Now omphaloceles, where the viscera are encased in Wharton's jelly, are sometimes delivered by c/s for whatever reason.

I seem to remember from all the research I did, that the omphaloceles, being contained, are harder to deliver vaginally because it's like a ball attached to the abdomen, rather than a bunch of slinky slidey stuff, right?

And also that Omph babies tend to have other associated defects as well, were as gastro babies rarely have medical problems other than the actual gastro defect.


----------



## BugMacGee (Aug 18, 2006)

Yup, that sounds right. And it's got more protection.


----------



## ermom (Jul 22, 2014)

happyhippiemama said:


> My daughter was born with gastroschisis. Everything from her espophogus to her upper rectum (that would be... uh... _everything_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Was your doctor alright with doing the vaginal delivery, or did you have to force that idea and really stand up for your birth?


----------

