Help Please!: Determine the due date without ultrasound

[SnuggleBuggles]

If you want to have all sorts of prenatal screenings you have to weigh the pros of knowing the dates pretty well so you can have tests done at the optimal time.

But, if you don't plan to do things like an amnio, nuchal fold test or something like the quad screen then I personally don't see a reason to get the u/s. As the pregnancy progresses the dates will fall into place as you hear the heartbeat, feel fetal movement, get fundal height measurements and maybe have a mid pregnancy u/s.

Congratulations, by the way!! :)

Beth

[SnuggleBuggles]

If you want to have all sorts of prenatal screenings you have to weigh the pros of knowing the dates pretty well so you can have tests done at the optimal time.

But, if you don't plan to do things like an amnio, nuchal fold test or something like the quad screen then I personally don't see a reason to get the u/s. As the pregnancy progresses the dates will fall into place as you hear the heartbeat, feel fetal movement, get fundal height measurements and maybe have a mid pregnancy u/s.

Congratulations, by the way!! :)

Beth

[Marisa6826]

If your doctor is testing for a beta hCG and it's negative, I'd have to say that's a much more accurate test than the old 'pee on a stick' technique. The beta is looking at numbers. The stick is looking for a chemical reaction that can be altered by any number of variations (environmental or otherwise).

And with regard to your link, well, that article is almost eight years old, and the data it cites is over 20 years old. I really don't think that you can hold its claims as accurate. JMO.

Considering the number of Mamas here (myself included) that go through fertility treatments or have high risk pregnancies and undergo RPU, I don't think it's necessarily a valid argument that it's a dangerous risk to the fetus. You need to weigh the benefits, as well. In this case, is the benefit of knowing the gestational age of your fetus going to outweigh whatever potential small risk there may be? Again, JMO.

Perhaps some of the Doctor Mamas can chime in here. Dr. Mom, Sillygirl?

-m

ETA - Did you ask your doctor whether your beta numbers moved at all? A good book to have on hand (if you don't already) is Taking Care of Your Fertility.

[Marisa6826]

If your doctor is testing for a beta hCG and it's negative, I'd have to say that's a much more accurate test than the old 'pee on a stick' technique. The beta is looking at numbers. The stick is looking for a chemical reaction that can be altered by any number of variations (environmental or otherwise).

And with regard to your link, well, that article is almost eight years old, and the data it cites is over 20 years old. I really don't think that you can hold its claims as accurate. JMO.

Considering the number of Mamas here (myself included) that go through fertility treatments or have high risk pregnancies and undergo RPU, I don't think it's necessarily a valid argument that it's a dangerous risk to the fetus. You need to weigh the benefits, as well. In this case, is the benefit of knowing the gestational age of your fetus going to outweigh whatever potential small risk there may be? Again, JMO.

Perhaps some of the Doctor Mamas can chime in here. Dr. Mom, Sillygirl?

-m

ETA - Did you ask your doctor whether your beta numbers moved at all? A good book to have on hand (if you don't already) is Taking Care of Your Fertility.

[kusumat]

My last period was in Sept. I got blood tests for preg late last month and the middle of this month. Both came out neg.

We tested again yesterday and it was positive. OB ordered the ultrasound exam tomorrow to determine the due date. I came across the article on the risks of this method and prefer other ways. Any thought? TIA!

http://www.mothering.com/articles/pregnancy_birth/birth_preparation/ultrasound-risks.html

[kusumat]

My last period was in Sept. I got blood tests for preg late last month and the middle of this month. Both came out neg.

We tested again yesterday and it was positive. OB ordered the ultrasound exam tomorrow to determine the due date. I came across the article on the risks of this method and prefer other ways. Any thought? TIA!

http://www.mothering.com/articles/pregnancy_birth/birth_preparation/ultrasound-risks.html

[daniele_ut]

There really isn't another way besides ultrasound to determine an accurate due date if you don't know the date of your last menstrual period. Even using LMP the date can be off by several weeks for women with long and irregular cycles. An ultrasound done in the early weeks of pregnancy is the most reliable indication of gestational age. Once you get to 18 weeks or so the measurements can be off by a week or more.

It's a matter of your comfort level, I suppose. Are you comfortable going through the next 8 months not certain how far along you really are? What if you have pre-term labor at some point? There is a cut off point at which they will no longer give steroids to help with lung maturity and a woman who is uncertain about her due date may not receive the appropriate treatment.

I have to agree that that article is pretty old news. I had multiple ultrasounds with my last pregnancy and have had 7 so far this time around. I'm not worried in the least.

[daniele_ut]

There really isn't another way besides ultrasound to determine an accurate due date if you don't know the date of your last menstrual period. Even using LMP the date can be off by several weeks for women with long and irregular cycles. An ultrasound done in the early weeks of pregnancy is the most reliable indication of gestational age. Once you get to 18 weeks or so the measurements can be off by a week or more.

It's a matter of your comfort level, I suppose. Are you comfortable going through the next 8 months not certain how far along you really are? What if you have pre-term labor at some point? There is a cut off point at which they will no longer give steroids to help with lung maturity and a woman who is uncertain about her due date may not receive the appropriate treatment.

I have to agree that that article is pretty old news. I had multiple ultrasounds with my last pregnancy and have had 7 so far this time around. I'm not worried in the least.

[o_mom]

If you had a negative blood test the middle of Nov and then a positive blood test yesterday, most likely ovulation was in the first half of Nov. If they are quatitative tests, you might get a slight hint from the numbers if it is closer to the first or the 15th, but not much.

I don't know for sure that there is no harm in ultrasound, but a due date that is incorrect by more than a few days can have huge implications later on. The problem you are going to run into is what date they will give you without an U/S. If they set your due date earlier than what it really is, you risk that they are going to push for induction or other interventions when you don't have the baby by that date. If your date is off by more than a couple weeks, you risk inducing when the baby is still premature. OTOH, if they give you a due date later than what it should be, you risk the baby being treated as premature (with all the interventions) even if he or she comes on time.

In the interest of full disclosure, I had early u/s with all three of my pregnancies. The first had multiple because of fertility issues. The second also had multiple, one for dating (hadn't had a period) and several for bleeding. My third had only one for dating because I was fairly certain I ovulated late and wanted a correct date.

[o_mom]

If you had a negative blood test the middle of Nov and then a positive blood test yesterday, most likely ovulation was in the first half of Nov. If they are quatitative tests, you might get a slight hint from the numbers if it is closer to the first or the 15th, but not much.

I don't know for sure that there is no harm in ultrasound, but a due date that is incorrect by more than a few days can have huge implications later on. The problem you are going to run into is what date they will give you without an U/S. If they set your due date earlier than what it really is, you risk that they are going to push for induction or other interventions when you don't have the baby by that date. If your date is off by more than a couple weeks, you risk inducing when the baby is still premature. OTOH, if they give you a due date later than what it should be, you risk the baby being treated as premature (with all the interventions) even if he or she comes on time.

In the interest of full disclosure, I had early u/s with all three of my pregnancies. The first had multiple because of fertility issues. The second also had multiple, one for dating (hadn't had a period) and several for bleeding. My third had only one for dating because I was fairly certain I ovulated late and wanted a correct date.

[bubbaray]

I wouldn't worry about the risk of one u/s. I discussed prenatal u/s with my peri and he said that as long as it is used for *medical* reasons, not to worry about it. He did advise me against "fun" u/s (4d) used solely for the purpose of getting video/photos/gender.

I had a bunch of 1st tri u/s with both PGys. And I had amnio's and level II u/s with both too. All were done for medical reasons.

HTH

Melissa

DD#1: 04/2004

DD#2: 01/2007

[bubbaray]

I wouldn't worry about the risk of one u/s. I discussed prenatal u/s with my peri and he said that as long as it is used for *medical* reasons, not to worry about it. He did advise me against "fun" u/s (4d) used solely for the purpose of getting video/photos/gender.

I had a bunch of 1st tri u/s with both PGys. And I had amnio's and level II u/s with both too. All were done for medical reasons.

HTH

Melissa

DD#1: 04/2004

DD#2: 01/2007

[sidmand]

I specifically asked my OB about the risk of ultrasounds because a) I have many because of my high-risk pregnancy (like at every appointment, so thus far I've had at least four, including one Level II ultrasound) and b) because I have a son with speech delays and was concerned...

She assured me that the ultrasound they perform there is of sound waves only that will not hurt the fetus (a 2-D ultrasound). For me, the risks of the ultrasound are greatly outweighed by the help that the ultrasound may ultimately give me and I've chosen to have them as the OB sees fit.

I'm trying to make the best, informed decision for myself, and I know other's situations may be different, but for me, after speaking with the OB, I felt the risk of the ultrasound was minimal enough and the benefits great.

Debbie
http://b3.lilypie.com/WT7Im4/.png[/img] (][img)


http://tickers.baby-gaga.com/p/dev110pr___.png[/img] (][img)

[sidmand]

I specifically asked my OB about the risk of ultrasounds because a) I have many because of my high-risk pregnancy (like at every appointment, so thus far I've had at least four, including one Level II ultrasound) and b) because I have a son with speech delays and was concerned...

She assured me that the ultrasound they perform there is of sound waves only that will not hurt the fetus (a 2-D ultrasound). For me, the risks of the ultrasound are greatly outweighed by the help that the ultrasound may ultimately give me and I've chosen to have them as the OB sees fit.

I'm trying to make the best, informed decision for myself, and I know other's situations may be different, but for me, after speaking with the OB, I felt the risk of the ultrasound was minimal enough and the benefits great.

Debbie
http://b3.lilypie.com/WT7Im4/.png[/img] (][img)


http://tickers.baby-gaga.com/p/dev110pr___.png[/img] (][img)