lining reduced by 1mm in 1 week?

[Tryingx]

hi all

i had a scan last week which showed a lining of 6mm and a corpus luteum (dr seemed to think i had ovulated a day earlier).

i had a private scan today (8 days later) and the lady sed there is a collapsing corpus luteum and a 5mm lining.

does anyone have any ideas wat this means? can the lining shrink by 1mm in 8 days or is this just a difference in the way that they measured the lining? does collapsing corpus luteum mean that my period is on its way? does the 5mm lining at, wat i think is 9dpo, bad for a pregnancy to happen?

 

[phoenixrose]

1 mm is a very small measurement so it it possible that it is the difference of the person testing it. Each person would probably be consistent but maybe two different people are not going to get exactly the same number. I was trying to find a picture of it, but I have also wondered the same thing. Does the lining shrink a little if there is no implantation and then therefore a collapsing corpus luteum. Some pictures that I find suggest that idea but I can't find a concrete answer. But that would be a good question to ask the doc.

Here's an example of a picture I'm talking about:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MenstrualCycle2.png
Look at the bottom of the graph, the endometrium curves up at the peak of the luteal phase and then starts to curve down again...so I wonder if it's true, that it does shrink a little.

 

[Tryingx]

I found this info by a dr:
The lining stops getting thicker after ovulation..it stays the same, or it may even get a little thinner after ovulation.
https://infertilityblog.blogspot.com/2008/06/endometrium.html

 

[_Nell]

It's likely the same, 1mm is nothing really, different machines, different eye, different point of the uterus for measurement for example.

The thickness of your lining is just fine. For IVF studies have shown the lining at O has better pregnancy statistics at 7mm or above. For natural or IUI pregnancies it's less important it seems and pregnancies are achieved in 4mm or more.

 

[Tryingx]

Thankyou nell. I hope u dont mimd me asking, but how did u find out about lining not being as important for natural conceptions?

 

[_Nell]

Thankyou nell. I hope u dont mimd me asking, but how did u find out about lining not being as important for natural conceptions?

Hi, Im a bit of a research addict and as I suffer from thin lining with my IVF's i've read a lot. There are lots of studies on the impact of lining on IVF, you can read actual studies on the pubmed website.

The majority of literature (not specifically IVF related) states that 'healthy' womens lining hasn't been studied for pregnancy and as such there is no firm minimum for pregnancy to be achieved.....if you think about it an embryo can implant in a tube where there is zero lining, so a few mm in your womb is sufficient. There are case samples of pregnancies in women with 4 and 5mm linings.

In truth I suspect if your lining was as low as 4mm, similar to that of ashermans sufferers, then your odds of achieving pregnacy would be low and pg would be rare. But at around 6 or 7mm I doubt many Dr.s would be overly concerned at all - bear in mind that your lining will change from cycle to cycle, so one scan isn't a firm view on what's going on for you