Betas did not double :(

[Laur1616]

I found out I was pregnant a little over a week ago. I went in for betas and my hcg did not double. I'm so worried and upset. Does anyone have any success stories with being in the same boat? My betas are as follows:

4/25: 14
4/27: 28
4/29: 48

Thanks so much for the support!

 

[glong88]

I found out I was pregnant a little over a week ago. I went in for betas and my hcg did not double. I'm so worried and upset. Does anyone have any success stories with being in the same boat? My betas are as follows:

4/25: 14
4/27: 28
4/29: 48

Thanks so much for the support!

Not far off doubling, what's your gp said? I'm now waiting for my beta and my gp said if they don't double I'll be sent for a scan

 

[maryanne1987]

That's only just off doubling. I wouldn't panic just yet. In our clinic they like to see an 90% rise in 48 hours while numbers are under 1000 and then after that an 90% rise in up to 72 hours. One thing I've learnt though if different doctors/clinics can have very different opinions on this. Id just see how the next blood draw goes before you assume the worst. I had a few results in my last pregnancy where my numbers didn't double and my little lady was born happy and healthy good luck!

 

[Laur1616]

Thank you for the positive thoughts. Waiting on my next results.

 

[MoBaby]

What dpo were you when you started?

My current pregnancies my hcg never doubled. My initial value was very good but the next 2 didn't double but were "close enough" according to my re.

 

[Laur1616]

My first level of 14, I was around 12dpo. I didn't miss my period at that point.

 

[MoBaby]

I would say then your hcg levels are low for gestation but there is a wide range. You'll have to wait to see from next Hcg levels. It's hard to say if viable or not and your ovulation could have been a day or two off, etc. hopefully all turns out okay!

 

[maryanne1987]

I would say then your hcg levels are low for gestation but there is a wide range. You'll have to wait to see from next Hcg levels. It's hard to say if viable or not and your ovulation could have been a day or two off, etc. hopefully all turns out okay!

I wouldnt say it's low for gestation? I had a negative blood test at 13dpo and ovulation was confirmed with temps and opk's. A lot of women have not even got their bfp by 12dpo. I haven't in any of my successful pregnancies.

 

[MoBaby]

Her 14 dpo would be 28 which would be low for 14dpo . She said she was 12dpo at 4/25. 28 is low for 14dpo but not outside the "range". Trust me- after 10 pregnancies all with hcg levels checked and dealing with a fertility dr since 2011 28 would be considered low for 14dpo. But like I said not outside the normal. Most fertility docs like to see at least 50 at 14dpo. But since she isn't sure of ovulation she may be a couple days less than thought so the levels may not be low for gestation. Really hcg levels don't tell the entire story nor do they have to follow a 48 hour doubling time always. Things can be perfectly fine with low betas and Non doubling betas just like things can go really wrong for normal or high hcgs that double normally.

 

[maryanne1987]

I too spent 7 years dealing with infertility and have have 18 pregnancies where betas have been checked. Implantation does not always happen untill 12dpo so how can any doctor expect a certain level by 12dpo? Lots of women including myself myself will not get a positive result till at least AF due date? I guess this expectation varies where your from but in all the fertility clinics in the UK ive visited over the years none what so ever have expected such a high beta so early? In fact I've never had a beta that high so early in any of my successful pregnancies. Our clinic is great, once a you have had a positive test then the first number is insignificant, it's the second draw and how it rises that matters. Guess it shows the difference in what health providers expect.

 

[MoBaby]

Im in the US. There are many studies on successful pregnancies and initial betas. Granted most of them are from fertility studies but there is well documented date that early beta (14-16 dpo) has a significant effect on the outcome of the pregnancy. 50 is not really a high beta for 14dpo. Most pregnancies would be implanted prior to 12 dpo although there is the exception and there are successful pregnancies from late implanters. I feel the initial number is important as well as the next betas BUT betas do not always predict the outcome of the pregnancy even when compared to data out there. For example my current pregnancy I was 611 17dpo; 1090 20 dpo; almost 2000 22 dpo then no more betas. So by "doubling standards" it wasnt looking good but my initial beta was good and the RE was satisfied by the increase.
I think there is more concern when initial betas are low and do not double. But with anything there are good outcomes with low, slow rising hcg levels. Really imho hcg levels do not predict much as I myself have had low betas with miscarriage, high betas with miscarriage and normal betas with miscarriage. And a current pregnancy with wonky betas. I also know of one other girl in the same situation as me and just delivered her baby a week ago. Her initial beta was good although she didnt see doubling until the fourth or fifth beta. I've also seen some with low slow rising betas go on to have successful pregnancies. In the end its really the ultrasound that matters and I feel betas just cause unnecessary worry most of the time. I hope your results show a nice doubling time.

 

[blasiandoll92]

I found out I was pregnant a little over a week ago. I went in for betas and my hcg did not double. I'm so worried and upset. Does anyone have any success stories with being in the same boat? My betas are as follows:

4/25: 14
4/27: 28
4/29: 48

Thanks so much for the support!

Hey Laura. Please let us know your next level. I know it will be great

 

[lakotachris]

Im in the US. There are many studies on successful pregnancies and initial betas. Granted most of them are from fertility studies but there is well documented date that early beta (14-16 dpo) has a significant effect on the outcome of the pregnancy. 50 is not really a high beta for 14dpo. Most pregnancies would be implanted prior to 12 dpo although there is the exception and there are successful pregnancies from late implanters. I feel the initial number is important as well as the next betas BUT betas do not always predict the outcome of the pregnancy even when compared to data out there. For example my current pregnancy I was 611 17dpo; 1090 20 dpo; almost 2000 22 dpo then no more betas. So by "doubling standards" it wasnt looking good but my initial beta was good and the RE was satisfied by the increase.
I think there is more concern when initial betas are low and do not double. But with anything there are good outcomes with low, slow rising hcg levels. Really imho hcg levels do not predict much as I myself have had low betas with miscarriage, high betas with miscarriage and normal betas with miscarriage. And a current pregnancy with wonky betas. I also know of one other girl in the same situation as me and just delivered her baby a week ago. Her initial beta was good although she didnt see doubling until the fourth or fifth beta. I've also seen some with low slow rising betas go on to have successful pregnancies. In the end its really the ultrasound that matters and I feel betas just cause unnecessary worry most of the time. I hope your results show a nice doubling time.

If I read this correctly I think I do agree and there are always variables and exceptions but I will tell you the only three times my betas started low the pregnancies were non viable. I just had a non viable last week ie: blighted ovum where my hcg was 49 at 14 dpo and I KNEW when I conceived. They doubled close to normal but never really took off the way most women's do at a certain point and always on the low end of normal so I think women should continue to encourage others with the happy ending stories but perhaps refrain from the as "long as it is doubling" it's fine and the number doesn't matter because for me the number DID matter. With my five healthy pregnancies I had higher starts and faster doubling then the three that were non viable even THOUGH those three did technically fall into doubling.

 

[MoBaby]

I agree with you lakota. That's why I think the initial. Beta is very important as well just like with you're outcome. I've had the same thing happen. Beta at 14dpo was 32 after ivf so knew when conception happened. Doubled like it should then at ultrasound no heartbeat and measured 6 days behind.

 

[blasiandoll92]

I agree with you lakota. That's why I think the initial. Beta is very important as well just like with you're outcome. I've had the same thing happen. Beta at 14dpo was 32 after ivf so knew when conception happened. Doubled like it should then at ultrasound no heartbeat and measured 6 days behind.

Hi, I have had two babies and they never measured my betas with them. They always told me that I ovulated late tho. I had period bleeding on 4/25 and then it went away. I spotted on 4/26 very lightly. I took a early pregnancy test and the line was very, very, very faint. I went to the doctor and his pregnancy test was negative, but he took blood from me. I went home and took a digital which read pregnant 1-2. He called me with my results and kept making me come in so here they are. Is that bad? My period is irregular so I honestly dont know when I had my last one.
4/29 - 8
5/02(2 days later) - 17
5/03 (1 day later) - 25

 

[BunnyN]

I think the point is that just because your betta hasnt quite doubled it doesnt automatically mean things are going badly. Of course there is worry and you would like to have seen higher numbers but there is no reason to assume the worst until there is a solid reason to. Slightly low bettas isnt a solid reason.

 

[lakotachris]

I think it depends largely on if you are certain of your dates. I have done massive reading and research on this having recently gone through two losses this year and one a couple of years ago. Being extremely regular I absolutely knew I was 14 dpo at my first beta draw and on those three I was quite low vs. my 5 healthy were I was a 2-3 hundred higher.

If you have any wiggle room for late implantation or late ovulation as sperm live 5 days then the beta being low isn't necessarily concerning. The vast majority of low beta cases I read had room for this variable. I only read a very small handful that were absolutely certain of being 14 dpo having low beta that went on to have successful pregnancies (there were a few). Even if you had sex once you can theoretically add 5 days because sperm live 5 days BUT in my case I got a positive pregnancy test 6 days before my period which ruled any of that out and lined up perfectly with a regular 14 day ovulation.

I think what Mo and I are trying to say is everyone instantly says low betas mean nothing and I think that is not always true. I think they may or may not mean not something depending on each situation. In my case I KNEW when I had conceived and I KNEW I was definitely 14 dpo so the 49 hcg was in fact too low. Even my OB acknowledged the range that people so freely show is dependent on actual DPO and the chart takes into consideration variables.

I think in many cases there is room for late ovulation and implantation to be factored in and then the low beta isn't concerning. But when a person such as myself knows I'm a solid 4 weeks pregnant 49 was too low. Also, in MOST cases (again not all) at some point the beta takes off and in all three of my losses it didn't it hovered right at just doubling enough to make doctors think viable. Mine consistent "doubled" but each time were increasing under if that makes sense even the day I lost this one, they had qualified as doubling. It was in fact a blighted ovum.

 

[BunnyN]

That all makes sense. The OP asked if there were any success stories with similar results. The short answer is yes there are. The numbers are enough to worry but are also enough to have hope that they will still pick up.

 

[maryanne1987]

That was exactly the point I was trying to make, the op asked for success stories. I'm sure she is perfectly aware of 'the studies'. There are lots and lots of ladies who go on to have healthy pregnancies with low levels, including myself. There are also lots of ladies who go on to lose babies where their levels would be considered normal. I'm On my third healthy pregnancy where if I went by those studies my babies would not be classed as viable. There is plenty of hope so don't assume the worst just yet. I kinda feel sorry for op having to read all of this. I hope it doesn't add extra stress and worry, I'm sure she is worried enough.

 

[blasiandoll92]

That was exactly the point I was trying to make, the op asked for success stories. I'm sure she is perfectly aware of 'the studies'. There are lots and lots of ladies who go on to have healthy pregnancies with low levels, including myself. There are also lots of ladies who go on to lose babies where their levels would be considered normal. I'm On my third healthy pregnancy where if I went by those studies my babies would not be classed as viable. There is plenty of hope so don't assume the worst just yet. I kinda feel sorry for op having to read all of this. I hope it doesn't add extra stress and worry, I'm sure she is worried enough.

You are right! My levels are low now but doubling. Those other stories are really scaring me!