Pregnancy & Motherhood Forum

by **erin860** » Thu Dec 03, 2015 3:02 pm

Thank you for your reply and willingness to share and answer our questions. God has given you a talent and it is so nice of you to share your talent with us. Your reply also made me feel better. I left my appointment with an unanswered feeling but feel much better now.

Also, to the other women who had posted a question, I am so sorry for your losses. I'll be praying for God to give you peace during this time.

by **erin860** » Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:24 pm

Hi again, I have another question for you. I had my first trimester screening today. The fluid at the neck looked perfect she said but she was unable to see the nose. She said in her report she was going to write that it was not detectable, not that it was absent. How common is this at 12 weeks to be unable to identify the presence or absence of a nasal bone? Thank you

by **Butterbeans** » Thu Dec 10, 2015 1:20 pm

erin860 wrote:Hi again, I have another question for you. I had my first trimester screening today. The fluid at the neck looked perfect she said but she was unable to see the nose. She said in her report she was going to write that it was not detectable, not that it was absent. How common is this at 12 weeks to be unable to identify the presence or absence of a nasal bone? Thank you

Hi there

It is actually a required component of the Nuchal Translucency scan (11-13w6d) to detect a nasal bone. Absence of a nasal bone is a soft marker for Down's Syndrome. It doesn't guarantee Down's, but in the presence of other markers it becomes concerning. In order to obtain a picture of the nuchal fluid, the baby HAS to be on it's back showing it's profile - it is the ONLY orientation that an acceptable nuchal measurement can be taken. The fact that this tech took a nuchal measurement without the face aligned to it's body concerns me. Best case scenario, she took a crappy and unacceptable nuchal picture (which makes that measurement inaccurate and void unfortunately).

However, babies are rarely in the perfect position to see a nasal bone or nuchal translucency at 12 weeks, and many factors can contribute to failure to see it - like fetal position, uterus position, bladder volume, maternal abdominal fat, etc. This is why the NT scan takes so long and patients are often re0booked for a do-over.

In all likelihood, your baby is fine, the NT is fine and the nasal bone is fine and present. I think you just had a bad scan.
You should be re-evaluated. If the reporting radiologist is happy with the nuchal for whatever reason, (he/she shouldn't be if the baby's head is cranked to the side - do you have any pics?), the doctor may ask to have particular attention paid to the nasal bone at your detailed ultrasound at 18 weeks. If the baby WAS in the perfect spot for the nuchal and the nasal bone was really and truly absent, your doctor may recommend a fetal echocardiogram to look at heart defects associate with Down's, or genetic counselling

good luck, I hope everything turns out. Please update me.

xox

by **tdarrow** » Fri Dec 11, 2015 9:41 am

Butterbeans,

You said to ask anything about ultrasounds so here is my "million" dollar question. From the 2 pictures I have here what would you say I'm having as far as the whole nub theory thing goes? the tech said the baby would not cooperate and he/she was moving around like crazy. The NT scan went great and she was able to find the nasal bone and that the baby looked normal and healthy at this stage. :-)

. Which is wonderful. I was just curious to what I was having in accordance to the pictures. I did have the Informaseq blood draw and I'm expecting the results next week. So that is exciting. Saying prayers that everything comes back normal and healthy. Anyway, take a look if you want and tell me what you think. :-)

God Bless!!

by **erin860** » Thu Dec 24, 2015 4:59 pm

I just wanted to update for anyone reading this who finds themselves in the same situation with not being able to see a nasal bone. I was re-scanned at a major hospital and the nasal bone was present and the fluid was the correct amount. Whether the bone was there all along or prayer helped it grow, its there! I was pretty worried waiting to be rechecked but all is good. Thank the Lord!

by **Amanda0713** » Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:21 am

Wonderful news Erin, congrats!

by **KBARRON277** » Wed Dec 30, 2015 9:43 am

Hi butterbeans!

So I just had my first ultrasound on the 28th, I believe I was 5w5d or 5w6d. While the Dr was doing the ultrasound we saw a gestational sac, yolk sac, and a tiny fetal pole. However she said she could not measure the sac because the Machine will only read 5w5d. My appointment was at 8am so I may not have technically finished the 5w5d all the way through.

Anyway I am a bit concerned but was wondering if this was normal or not? I know it is still early days.

Thanks so much!!

by **BabyLlove** » Wed Jan 13, 2016 9:03 am

Hi Butterbeans,

I have a question about my ultrasound. This was at 12 weeks and 3 days ( 2 weeks ago), I have been looking and looking and can't figure out what that bright, white spot is by the legs? Do you have any ideas? It is in a couple of the shots, it's obviously not a leg or and arm(I think). I haven't seen it in other ultrasounds from other people, so of course it plants that little seed of concern. Thank you for your time!

by **BabyLlove** » Wed Jan 13, 2016 9:05 am

Just to clarify not the white where the feet are, but towards the bottom.

by **Butterbeans** » Wed Jan 13, 2016 6:37 pm

Hi there!

From these images, the genital tubercle (primitive structure from which the genitalia develop) is not well seen, the beam literally has to be cutting the baby in a longitudinal section right through the tubercle. however, I can see a bit of it in the second picture, and it favors female (pointing up is male, pointing down is female). It's still very early, but it's my best guess!! Good luck and wishing you a healthy pregnacy!

tdarrow wrote:Butterbeans,

You said to ask anything about ultrasounds so here is my "million" dollar question. From the 2 pictures I have here what would you say I'm having as far as the whole nub theory thing goes? the tech said the baby would not cooperate and he/she was moving around like crazy. The NT scan went great and she was able to find the nasal bone and that the baby looked normal and healthy at this stage. . Which is wonderful. I was just curious to what I was having in accordance to the pictures. I did have the Informaseq blood draw and I'm expecting the results next week. So that is exciting. Saying prayers that everything comes back normal and healthy. Anyway, take a look if you want and tell me what you think. God Bless!!

by **Butterbeans** » Wed Jan 13, 2016 6:40 pm

You are likely looking at the bones of the pelvis! The skeleton is calcified enough at this point to be echogenic

Nothing to fear

Healthy pregnancy to you!

BabyLlove wrote:Hi Butterbeans,

I have a question about my ultrasound. This was at 12 weeks and 3 days ( 2 weeks ago), I have been looking and looking and can't figure out what that bright, white spot is by the legs? Do you have any ideas? It is in a couple of the shots, it's obviously not a leg or and arm(I think). I haven't seen it in other ultrasounds from other people, so of course it plants that little seed of concern. Thank you for your time!

by **Butterbeans** » Wed Jan 13, 2016 6:46 pm

So so so sorry for the late reply!!!
Holidays were hectic and my own pregnancy is exhausting me!
Yes, some of the older machines and older software will give an "out of range" reading for a mean gestational sac diameter that falls below a correlation to 5w5d.
Not to worry though, the MGSD measurement is a good estimate of pregnancy age, but is no where near as reliable as the crown rump length. It is usually done just to see if it agress with the CRL and if there is not yet a fetal pole present, however.
It is not totally accurate and doesn't always agree with the gestational age predicted by your last menstrual period, so don't worry if the measurement fell below 5w5d.
I hope by now you have been re-scanned and you are assured everything is coming along swimmingly!

KBARRON277 wrote:Hi butterbeans!

So I just had my first ultrasound on the 28th, I believe I was 5w5d or 5w6d. While the Dr was doing the ultrasound we saw a gestational sac, yolk sac, and a tiny fetal pole. However she said she could not measure the sac because the Machine will only read 5w5d. My appointment was at 8am so I may not have technically finished the 5w5d all the way through.

Anyway I am a bit concerned but was wondering if this was normal or not? I know it is still early days.

Thanks so much!!

by **Butterbeans** » Wed Jan 13, 2016 7:00 pm

Great news, I knew it was there! There's no way it could have been diagnosed as absent from the nuchal translucency pictures, as the baby's head (like I mentioned previously) was not aligned to the body. Happy for you!

erin860 wrote:I just wanted to update for anyone reading this who finds themselves in the same situation with not being able to see a nasal bone. I was re-scanned at a major hospital and the nasal bone was present and the fluid was the correct amount. Whether the bone was there all along or prayer helped it grow, its there! I was pretty worried waiting to be rechecked but all is good. Thank the Lord!