36yrs, going on for amnio due to high risk

[truly_blessed]

was that NHS as well hun, not sure where you are. The midwife talked about DS screening yesterday and I had decided I didn't want any tests but DF wants to have them. His says ultimately it's my choice but he doesn't know how we would cope so it was a bit stressful last night.

Now I know about this extra ultrasound, I think I will do the same as you have done and then at least I know the amnio is really necessary. I did ask the MW about 3d scans and such and she said even they don't give any more indications of DS. Obviously she isn't up to date on the latest technology it seems. Thanks from the bottom of my heart, it really helps what is a very difficult decision to make. x

 

[TiggerToo]

i had an amnio at 18 weeks due to 1:3 chance of trisomy 18. i am 40 years old.

first off my results came back absolutely perfect and i will NEVER get those tests again. soooo many people end up with more invasive procedures due to these blood tests. i think they need to perfect the tests a bit before suggesting them. not sure they are quite ready yet.

secondly - the amnio wasnt bad. i did a lot of research and i found that now that they are doing them with an u/s the m/c rate is like 1/1600.. hard to believe they actually did amnio's blind, isnt it?? the last risk studies were performed in the 1970's and most docs are still going by those stats.

here is a link i found.

https://www.parents.com/pregnancy/stages/amniocentesis/risk-of-miscarriage-from-amnio-low/

GL and keep us posted on how everything goes... honestly - the waiting is the absolute worst part

About those Down stats - you're right. And they're also based on a LOWER proportion of +35 year old women who had babies back then, as opposed to now. So the numbers were skewed population-wise.

The number of Down children born to mothers UNDER the age of 30 is actually HIGHER - because they have more babies to start with.

The so-called science of stats is more like - let's plug in a "statistical test", and if that one doesn't give us the answer we're looking for, we'll pick another and then another and just see what one gives us the desired result. Then we'll write our paper based on that answer.

I threw most stats out the window after taking a grad-level stats course. It convinced me that even the purest of numbers is biased, skewed, and partially contrived. I know we have to have some sort of basis for looking at the world, but I take them with a grain of salt. Especially Down babies - how many do you actually see out in public with their older parents? In ten years I can remember two. One was a baby and the other was a toddler. I see far more healthy babies (at least based on appearances). I'm more interested in what actual labs say and in real life experiences and not so-called scientists.

Risks are real, but our perception of those risks just may be skewed by lousy and practically antiquated mathematics.

Sort of an interloper - I'm only TTC #1, but given my age (few days shy of 38!) I do spy over here on occasion just to see what the latest and greatest is for this sort of thing. I consider what happens on this forum as more indicative of the REAL world for us +35s over a bunch of numbers in a journal. Oh, and when it's me on here, I'll be biting my nails just like the rest of you, because knowing a lot of details is MEANINGLESS when it's you in the MD's office, and as an RN I completely realize that. I'm not as blase as I might sound. I just try very hard to be realistic and remain as sane as possible (and I know when you're pregnant it goes right out the window, and that's okay and I'm ready for that - especially given how hard most of us at this age work to get to that point).

Also remember that sometimes docs call for extra tests because in this litigious age they feel they need to cover their butts from all angles.

Good luck to all of you - all of your pregnancies give me hope and keep me positive, and I rejoice, hope and FX with and for all of you! I only hope I'm welcome here.

 

[bbforme]

was that NHS as well hun, not sure where you are. The midwife talked about DS screening yesterday and I had decided I didn't want any tests but DF wants to have them. His says ultimately it's my choice but he doesn't know how we would cope so it was a bit stressful last night.

Now I know about this extra ultrasound, I think I will do the same as you have done and then at least I know the amnio is really necessary. I did ask the MW about 3d scans and such and she said even they don't give any more indications of DS. Obviously she isn't up to date on the latest technology it seems. Thanks from the bottom of my heart, it really helps what is a very difficult decision to make. x

Level II ultrasound is sensitive and detailed than your general u/s. It costs a pretty penny as well - alot more expensive than the amnio procedure, but worth our peace of mind. The 3D scan was just an added bonus for fun from our doc, but not apart of the evaluation of baby.

I hope that helps!

 

[Jellybean0k]

With my first, I was told that my bloods showed signs of downs, and were going to schedule me for an amnio, but I told them no, and she was born perfectly normal

 

[TiggerToo]

thank you kosh for your im and thank you all so much for concern and support!

now to the update.....

everything went very well tuesday!

Upon arriving at my appointment, i met with 2-genetic consolers (one being a student who was shadowing). They basically explained to me everything i already knew (thanks to this forum!) about what an amniocentesis is and why i was recommend by my midwife in the first place. What i suspected all along was confirmed…my blood test were indeed within a “normal” range, and that it was my nt scan that was at the higher end of “normal”, albeit, the higher end of normal at 95 percentile. However, 2.9mm is still normal. Since my age already puts me at a higher risk, coupled with the nt scan, that’s why i was being offered an amnio and an option to confirm.

However, first thing first, i was to have a level ii ultrasound. I was told by doc that all women over 35 should have a level ii, just to make sure all is progressing normally. The level ii would also determine if there are any “soft markers” for down’s. After the ultrasound, i can then decide if i’d like to proceed with the amnio. (they did state as a warning, that soft markers are only found on 50% of confirmed ds fetuses.)

our ultrasound showed a very active, perfectly healthy looking baby boy! Everything about baby was spot on! My risk level was raised from 1:42 to 1: 84. So dh and i decided that since everything “technically” is within normal ranges and our baby appears to be very normal and healthy, to hold off on the amnio.

We are going back in 3-weeks for another level ii ultrasound, just to look again and confirm all is going well (i can still have the amnio at that time should i choose), but all in all, with both agree that with our doctor giving us at 97% chance all is good – we don’t need to proceed with an amnio at the time.

We both feel at peace our decision to hold off and can sleep at night with the information we have now.

i felt armed with information upon my appointment and would have felt otherwise without this forum and all the advice from all the lovely members!

yaaaaayyyyyy!!!!

 

[TiggerToo]

Thank you KOSH for your IM and THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR CONCERN AND SUPPORT!

NOW TO THE UPDATE.....

Everything went very well Tuesday!

Upon arriving at my appointment, I met with 2-genetic consolers (one being a student who was shadowing). They basically explained to me everything I already knew (thanks to this forum!) about what an amniocentesis is and why I was recommend by my midwife in the first place. What I suspected all along was confirmed…my blood test were indeed within a “normal” range, and that it was my NT Scan that was at the higher end of “normal”, albeit, the higher end of normal at 95 percentile. HOWEVER, 2.9mm is still normal. Since my age already puts me at a higher risk, coupled with the NT Scan, that’s why I was being offered an amnio and an option to confirm.

However, first thing first, I was to have a level II ultrasound. I was told by doc that ALL women over 35 should have a level II, just to make sure all is progressing normally. The level II would also determine if there are any “soft markers” for Down’s. After the ultrasound, I can then decide if I’d like to proceed with the amnio. (They did state as a warning, that soft markers are only found on 50% of confirmed DS fetuses.)

Our ultrasound showed a very active, perfectly healthy looking baby BOY! Everything about baby was spot on! My risk level was raised from 1:42 to 1: 84. So DH and I decided that since everything “technically” is within normal ranges and our baby appears to be very normal and healthy, to hold off on the amnio.

We are going back in 3-weeks for another level II ultrasound, just to look again and confirm all is going well (I can still have the amnio at that time should I choose), but all in all, with both agree that with our doctor giving us at 97% chance all is good – we don’t need to proceed with an amnio at the time.

We both feel at peace our decision to hold off and can sleep at night with the information we have now.

I felt armed with information upon my appointment and would have felt otherwise without this forum and all the advice from all the lovely members!

.....and as usual most of the information you were given AT your appointment would've been handy information to have BEFORE the appointment....why do they ALWAYS do that? I spend most of my time on the other side of the treatment table and it INFURIATES me (especially when, in my area of expertise, I know there's more to whatever the patient is being told and I legally can't say anything).

At any rate, I'M SO GLAD FOR YOUR NEWS!!!

 

[bbforme]

UPDATE:

We have another level II scheduled on 28 June to make sure all is still looking good.

I'll be sure to keep you gals posted!

 

[mafiamom]

great news!!!

 

[miel]

With Trystan i had two soft marker for down ...a stain in the heart and a bubble in the brain ....( but my blood test were very good ) however we had to have a other scan after a week to confirm the soft markers and they were there still i will do the amio....anyway with in a week his body had reabsorb the stain and the bubble ! so dont stress about the scan they cant give yu "false " alarm as well...

for this pregnancy our little boy also have a stain on the heart ( i think is a calcium deposit ) one more time my blood test was excellent so even not doing the scan ...as i found it may be even just a genetic marker and only that about the stain...

Here now in usa they are trying to change the protocol as they really believe those markers are something to worry about if you have more then 3 and even it doesnt mean anything !
good luck sweetie ...

 

[knitbit]

Make sure to get the second trimester blood draw. My risk went from 1/81 to 1/4700 based on the second trimester blood results. I think they give fairly pessimistic results during the first trimester, mostly due to age, and then adjust it with the final blood.

Good luck!

 

[bbforme]

Make sure to get the second trimester blood draw. My risk went from 1/81 to 1/4700 based on the second trimester blood results. I think they give fairly pessimistic results during the first trimester, mostly due to age, and then adjust it with the final blood.

Good luck!

I never heard of a 2nd trimester screen?! Wonder why my MW hadn't mentioned it. Okay...well, maybe I do know....I told her I didn't want anymore "screening".

I'll ask at my next appointment! Thanks for the info!

 

[knitbit]

Yeah, it's part of the "sequential screen" where they combine the first trimester NT ultrasound and blood serum with the second trimester blood. You really want to draw the second trimester blood between 16-20 weeks (according to my paperwork). It's realatively new and the combined screening is supposed to be better than just using the first trimester screen alone. Since you already have a first trimester result, you might as well get the full picture. I had already decided not to do amnio so the reduction in risk was very welcome.

 

[cayjay]

Some more info about the NT screening - my OB was trained by the actual doctor who invented the NT screening. I can't remember his name now but my doc said even the actual inventor only gets it right 90% of the time. Not good enough odds for me! If you want to know for definite, have the amnio, not the NT screening. I'm having mine next week. Good luck everyone!