Do U/S ever show a SMALL baby?

[laohaire]

It sounds like just about every pregnant woman on earth gets an ultrasound and is told her baby is HUGE.

I mean, seriously.

So, it leads one to wonder, does any woman go in and get told "oh, your baby is looking on the small side"?

If every baby were really "huge".... well, you know where I'm going.

Do HCPs really actually think the babies are large? Or is this just standard care? Give u/s, give the speech about huge baby. Get mama thinking about induction or ERCS and avoid the "danger" of "waiting" - for any baby, any size?

[felix23]

Yes, the U/S did show that both my dds were on the small side and that both were most likely IUGR babies. The first was born at 29 weeks weighing 1 lb 13 oz, the second was born at 37 weeks weighing 5 lbs 10 oz. Both also had large heads and small bodies.

I know other preemie moms that have had this experience also.

[elmh23]

My SIL had an IUGR baby. Born at 28wks at 1lb 8oz. Average for a 28weeker is 2.22 lbs.

[felix23]

Originally Posted by elmh23

My SIL had an IUGR baby. Born at 28wks at 1lb 8oz. Average for a 28weeker is 2.22 lbs.

Were they able to detect that on a U/S or did they find out after the baby was born? I had pre-eclampsia and they did an U/S the day before she was born, and the first thing they noticed was how tiny she was and how much larger her head was compared to the rest of her body.

[Marlet]

Mine do. And that's because they ARE small. The only thing that measures large on mine are their heads. Heck with my most recent I had an ultrasound at 32 weeks. Weight wise she came in about 1-1.5 weeks behind the average 32 weeker. Body measurement wise she came in 2 weeks behind the average 32 weeker. She was born at 36w3d and at 5 days old weighed 5 lbs 11 oz (so about average from what I just saw on babycenter....had to go check to make sure ).

Despite that I have yet to be told I'm having a small baby. Dead serious. My first ultrasound with this one was done as a "dating one" even though I didn't need it (had it at like 13 weeks...I was establishing patient status and that's what they required). DD3 was measuring small even then BUT because of her head size they changed her due date to an earlier one. They took ONE measurement and declared my correct due date (only one possible date ) wrong and upped it. I'm pretty sure they'll find their big measurement if they want it.

[erin_brycesmom]

My brother's wife was induced because the baby was predicted to be small. They were tracking the measurements and said it was not IUGR as baby was growing fine. The mom said it sounded odd but went along with it. Baby was small...5lbs something ounces but then she was also early.

With my first, they did an u/s before my induction and predicted 7.5lbs. Baby was actually 9.5lbs so they were wrong in the opposite direction.

[corrio]

Yes I have always gotten the small baby from my ultrasounds.. to the point where they would move my due date forward.. Helped with my last baby I was a 41 weeks from ovulation, ultrasound had me at 38 weeks.. She was born 6lbs7ozs..

[RolliePollie]

My mom was told my brother was too small and to keep eating and gain more weight! She ended up gaining about 90lbs (and even then they said he would be way small). He was fine at 7 and something lbs. Very average for her babies.

[elmh23]

Originally Posted by felix23

Were they able to detect that on a U/S or did they find out after the baby was born? I had pre-eclampsia and they did an U/S the day before she was born, and the first thing they noticed was how tiny she was and how much larger her head was compared to the rest of her body.

They detected it on u/s. She started measuring small for dates around 14 weeks I think. From then on she was considered high-risk and monitored frequently. They determined that SIL has a bicornate (sp?) uterus and the placenta was attached in a very small space so not growing properly, leading to niece being really small. She also has some other funky medical issues that might have lead to the small size.

[Fly Girl]

I've had 2 friends (both very thin) that had late ultrasounds and were told they were going to have smallish babies. One was told her baby was measuring around 6 lbs. He came out 8lbs 13oz. The other was told her baby was measuring pretty average around 7-7.5 lbs. Her DD was 9lbs 9oz!!

[AlexisT]

I think the reason we hear less about the "measuring small" babies is that measuring small can be a sign of something serious, and if your IUGR is the one that's caught, you're pretty grateful for it.

Also, providers seem to behave a bit differently when it comes to small babies. There's more concern about IUGR and possible causes and less "OMG this baby is HUGE and you will never be able to birth it!!!"

[1babysmom]

My SIL's baby was known to be measuring small before she was born courtesy of the u/s's she had. She was born at about 38 weeks and was just at 5 lbs.

[annekh23]

My first baby was IUGR, so I've done a fair bit of research about it. He wasn't diagnosed by ultrasound, I did have an ultrasound at 32 weeks for other reasons, before there were any signs of IUGR and he measured at the 75th centile, but from that point my fundal height didn't increase, we didn't need an ultrasound to know there was a problem! My other babies have been about 75th centile for gestation, so I believe that ultrasound was fairly accurate, the problem was only in it's very early stages, he was 25th centile for gestation, which some would exclude from an IUGR diagnosis as they use 10th centile as a criteria. Personally I feel that's a poor diagnostic criteria, as the problems associated with IUGR are not due to the absolute size, but due to the size being related to poor placental function and they are at risk of brain damage and still birth. Dropping from 75th to 25th in only 5 weeks is pretty severe growth compromise if you ask me and his body showed it, his head size was average (or above, I can't recall precisely), but his body was thin and his limbs even thinner, but the most noticeable feature was enlarged fontanelles, which did at least mean an easy birth due to the head moulding!

These days I hear far too many stories of doctors changing due dates based on later ultrasounds and I actually wish I was seeing more posts about babies measuring small.

However, after all my research I disagree with the conventional wisdom that ultrasound is the best screening tool, it's a great tool after the problem has been flagged, but I feel measurement of fundal height by the same caregiver, in the same location, with the same tape measure, combined with a good discussion with the mother is the best way. It's the pattern of the measurements not the exact measurement that is most important, my IUGR baby measured spot on, 32cm and 32 weeks, then didn't budge from there. My 2nd, normal growth baby measured 28cm and 32 weeks, which most people would flag as a problem, but it increased each week and she was 8lb8oz at birth, my 3rd was spot on all the way then a bit ahead, explained by a mild case of polyhydramnios.

[Litcrit]

My best friend just got a 'the baby's TINY!' for both of hers. They checked for problems with her first, but then no one was worried with her second - both babies were just small and skinny, but healthy.

[MsBlack]

u/s at 37wks showed "probably IUGR baby" at 4lb 10 (which I knew was hooey). Induction followed, baby was 6lb 5. Another time, 35wks, same diagnosis, induction brought a perfectly normal sized baby for gestational age.

Yes, sometimes u/s does make mistakes on the side of small! I just tend not to believe u/s size estimates unless they are confirmed by someone with very good palpation skills. Docs just tend NOT to have those skills anymore, they rely, unfortunately, too much upon u/s--even though it is known to err by 20-25% in either direction.

[AlexisT]

oh, fwiw, u/s erred on the small side with me. at 36 weeks (I got an extra u/s because baby was breech) the tech said that she estimated I'd be having a 7 lb baby. I had an 8lb1oz baby at 38 weeks.

Not small enough for concern but it does show they do err both ways.

[GoBecGo]

Not small, but accurate - the u/s said my DD was 7lbs14oz. She was born 4 days later, 7lbs 14.5oz

[Solose]

I have been told from the ultrasound that this baby is "on the small side of average." I was told with ds that he would be around 8 pounds and he turned out to be 6.8 lbs. so I am a little worried that this one will be really small, especially since I have gained very little weight this time and my belly is quite small for being this far along. So yes, sometimes the opposite does happen.

[beep]

At my last ultrasound I was told my baby was at the 28th percentile--in other words, on the small side of normal.

[OkiMom]

I was told with both of mine they were going to be small. My first they guessed was going to be around 6 lbs, she was 8 lbs 9 ozs. My second they said would be around 6 lbs again and she was 8lbs 5ozs. So, yes there are times when the ultrasound show a "small" baby and it turns out to be larger than expected.