Ultrasounds are bad??!

[EchoSoul]

After all the research I did during my pregnancy, I never stumbled across ultrasounds being bad. But I come here, and I mean...it makes sense... can anyone explain this? I found a couple sites, um...Dr Feder and Dr Ben Kim, and plan on getting the book before my next pregnancy as suggested by the later site.. but I guess... do any of you have any stories you'd be willing to share?

I had the first routine u/s when the doctor confirmed I was pregnant.. Said the due date was March 17th. I fought, tooth and nail, with my OB, saying that I didn't believe the u/s was correct, and he was NOT going to arrive then. He pretty much said, "I'm sorry you feel that way, but this is my science, and I trust it." I had another u/s done(my idea) to try and achieve a different due date, not like it did much... the next one(this was mere weeks before I went into labor) said the due date was March 28th. I told him that one felt much better, but it didn't do anything, and he said the first was more accurate and after much pleading from the two of us, agreed to give us a 2 week waiver. Fortunately, just mere days before I was to come into the office and get induced, I went into labor. Apparently my fluids were just loaded with meconium. Days before I went into labor I had been leaking amniotic fluid, but I thought my bladder was weak and it was my urine, so I never called the doctor..

Our son, who had the perfect sounding heart beat on the doppler, perfect u/s readings, was born, cried, and his heart stopped. They restarted his heart, he was given a spinal tap and sent to the NICU for two days where he had a fever of unknown origin. My belief is he suffered a little baby heart attack from the stress of the labor/birth itself, and from soaking up my stress due to the obnoxious l&d staff. The infection could have been from the frequent cervical checks during labor.

How do you guys, who do not commit to u/s, weigh the pros and cons out?

Soooo confused.

Edited by EchoSoul - 2/22/13 at 2:23pm

[LLQ1011]

It depends I guess. I thought I was against it but I ended up needing so so so many. Like 20. So I don't really know. My son had no issues at birth. He was a jaundice but otherwise is a chubby smart healthy 14 month old. I would also be curious to rea some sources.
 

[katelove]

I chose to limit ultrasounds with both my girls although I ended up having several with my second for a variety of reasons.

My thoughts are that they are a useful tool but overused. There is the potential for them to cause harm although no definitive evidence either way at this stage. The accuracy of findings is also quite variable.

When deciding whether to have an ultrasound or not I considered these questions:

Why is the USS being proposed?
How reliable is USS for this purpose?
Is there any other way to get this information?
What will we do with this information once we have it?

As an example we chose not to have first trimester ultrasounds with either pregnancy. I had certain dates, no history of miscarriage, no first trimester bleeding and we would not have terminated for Down's syndrome etc. If we had had any reason for concern, such as bleeding, then I probably would have had one.

We did choose to have 20 week morphology scans both times. One of the reasons is that we live in a regional city with no neonatal surgery. If a cardiac or other defect requiring surgery was identified (and knowing that there is not a 100% identification rate) then we would probably have chosen to give birth in a major centre rather than have to fly a sick newborn 6 hours to the closest children's hospital. As my first baby was born by c/s I also wanted to know where the placenta was as I was hoping for a VBAC the second time.

Sarah J Buckley has a good, referenced article on her website.

[Ragana]

I had a fairly conventional pregnancy with my first, including several USs, but chose the homebirth midwife route with my second (still ended up having DD2 in the hospital). My midwife was not totally against having one US, but her nurse respectfully argued against it. We chose to have one US and one blood test and opted out of the rest of the tests. Both kids turned out healthy. For us, it was a comfort level with tests - the second time we were more confident and chose not to repeat some bad experiences we had with tests the first time around. It was a situational decision and not a feeling for or against ultrasounds in general, if that makes sense.

In my experience talking with many friends and family members, the thing that USs seem to be wildly off on is weight. I know many parents who were told their child would be huge based on the ultrasound (preparing them mentally for a c-section?), when their baby was much smaller, sometimes by a pound or more off from the prediction.

BTW, the ultrasound was wrong about my DD2's due date - she was born on her due date correctly predicted by our midwife (the date we had worked out with her based on the specifics of our pregnancy and had chosen to go with).
 

[Ragana]

Originally Posted by katelove 


When deciding whether to have an ultrasound or not I considered these questions:


What will we do with this information once we have it?

This was very important in our decisionmaking as well.

[LLQ1011]

Thats true. My first and second pregnancies ended in pprom and loss at 18 weeks my sons pregnancy was a complicated as it gets. I needed ultrasounds to monitor things you would not normally need. So for me it was needed. But for most probably not

[dayiscoming2006]

I think it is good to have the 20 week anatomy scan to make sure baby is looking healthy in there and won't need help or anything. I've read somewhere that waiting til 24 weeks can be better for the scan since it will be a little more accurate, but I didn't have patience this time and all was good. I'm glad to know baby is well in there. I would limit them unless there was specific reason for it. I did have a first trimester scan this time, but I was dying to know if my baby was alive or not after an early miscarriage. Don't forget that doppler is much stronger than ultrasound. I think I read 1 minute of doppler is the equivalent a 35 min ultrasound.

I had ultrasounds with all my kids and they are healthy. I did doppler often with my first and he is fine. I limited doppler with my next two. And then this time I had doppler a few times, but I don't really want it anymore so I'm going to ask my midwife not to check with that anymore and see if she'll use a fetoscope if she really wants to hear the heartbeat. She does require me to use the doppler for labor. 

[EchoSoul]

Thanks everyone, for your responses! Our doctor would not accept any other form of EDD calculation except by the ultrasound. Not the LMF(is that right?) calender, or even when we told him that the date of conception that would've had to taken place to achieve the EDD the ultrasound was saying...was not PHYSICALLY possible. He wouldn't take anything but the ultrasound.

[dayiscoming2006]

Originally Posted by EchoSoul 

Thanks everyone, for your responses! Our doctor would not accept any other form of EDD calculation except by the ultrasound. Not the LMF(is that right?) calender, or even when we told him that the date of conception that would've had to taken place to achieve the EDD the ultrasound was saying...was not PHYSICALLY possible. He wouldn't take anything but the ultrasound.

I'd get a new doctor(or a midwife) then, if you knew when your first day of LMP(last menstrual period) was, that should have been enough. They should not require to have unnecessary scans. Most doctors seem to require the anatomy scan, but other than that.

[EchoSoul]

LMP! That was it! He fiddled with that before the ultrasound to get the estimate. But once we had the ultrasound and it had its precious EDD, that was it for him. We loved him as a person. As a doctor, eh... He was great for the first visits, very funny, very amiable. But once we got into the more serious aspects of the check-ups(cervical checks, etc), that was when I started having misgivings. We definitely plan on finding someone else for the next time around.

[Sol_y_Paz]

You can find someone else whenever at any point you choose.

[dayiscoming2006]

You have plenty of time to find a new provider if you are not satisfied with your current one.

[eabbmom]

US does not change outcomes: http://www.midwiferytoday.com/articles/prenatalultrasound.asp

US has also not been proven safe http://www.midwiferytoday.com/articles/ultrasound.asp

I had four with my first son and I regret it. He is healthy at 19 months but I am unsure if they may have had a lasting impact. With future pregnancies I will request use of fetascope instead of Doppler and if I feel like I want an ultrasound it will be once for ten minutes.

[Calladona]

I choose to skip any ultrasounds before 20 weeks.  I will always get the 20 week for a number of reasons - mainly related to method of delivery.  With my oldest, not having the information from my 20 week ultrasound could potentially have cost her her life.  Or mine.  We found a number of things that shaped my treatment and ultimately the delivery.

I'm not 100% sure that ultrasound is completely safe, particularly early on.  Doppler as well, again, particularly early on when things are first developing.

Remember for dating - baby can be conceived up to a week after doing the deed.  This is why charting is so useful - you can pin down the exact date you ovulated/conceived and get a truly accurate EDD.

And those late ultrasounds for size are just bunk.  I do think that if you're looking to see growth, you can use ultrasounds to keep an eye and make sure baby is continuing to grow, but for a truly accurate size estimate - they just aren't there...  Late ultrasounds also often check amniotic fluid and the method of measurement on that can be pretty inaccurate as well.

[EchoSoul]

    Quote:

Originally Posted by Calladona 

I choose to skip any ultrasounds before 20 weeks.  I will always get the 20 week for a number of reasons - mainly related to method of delivery.  With my oldest, not having the information from my 20 week ultrasound could potentially have cost her her life.  Or mine.  We found a number of things that shaped my treatment and ultimately the delivery.

I'm not 100% sure that ultrasound is completely safe, particularly early on.  Doppler as well, again, particularly early on when things are first developing.

Remember for dating - baby can be conceived up to a week after doing the deed.  This is why charting is so useful - you can pin down the exact date you ovulated/conceived and get a truly accurate EDD.

And those late ultrasounds for size are just bunk.  I do think that if you're looking to see growth, you can use ultrasounds to keep an eye and make sure baby is continuing to grow, but for a truly accurate size estimate - they just aren't there...  Late ultrasounds also often check amniotic fluid and the method of measurement on that can be pretty inaccurate as well.

That is why I began charting a couple months ago.. So in case any other provider argued with us(although I'm not planning on this ever being the case again..), I can have a better understanding of when my body ovulates, because at that time, I had NO idea, I didn't even track my menstrual cycles. They did check my amniotic fluid in the late ultrasound I had.. and found it was low. And said that was an indicator I'd be going into labor soon. I told them IF it was low, it was only because I hadn't been drinking as much water as I normally do. At that time our baby was also measuring around 6 lbs. Weeks later he was born 8 lbs 5 oz. I have no idea how quickly, or not, babies gain during the late stages of pregnancy, but I did know then that ultrasounds were totally useless when it came to predicting due dates and the weights of babies, I just kept my mouth shut about it. 

Originally Posted by dayiscoming2006 

You have plenty of time to find a new provider if you are not satisfied with your current one.

He's no longer our current one.. We ended that after my son's birth, lol.

Originally Posted by eabbmom 

US does not change outcomes: http://www.midwiferytoday.com/articles/prenatalultrasound.asp

US has also not been proven safe http://www.midwiferytoday.com/articles/ultrasound.asp

I had four with my first son and I regret it. He is healthy at 19 months but I am unsure if they may have had a lasting impact. With future pregnancies I will request use of fetascope instead of Doppler and if I feel like I want an ultrasound it will be once for ten minutes.

Been to that site... AWESOME articles. :)

[MeepyCat]

Originally Posted by eabbmom 

US does not change outcomes: http://www.midwiferytoday.com/articles/prenatalultrasound.asp

US has also not been proven safe http://www.midwiferytoday.com/articles/ultrasound.asp

I had four with my first son and I regret it. He is healthy at 19 months but I am unsure if they may have had a lasting impact. With future pregnancies I will request use of fetascope instead of Doppler and if I feel like I want an ultrasound it will be once for ten minutes.

I went over and read the first article, which seems to me to be overly dismissive of ultrasound screening.  In my opinion, the author fails to meaningfully engage with the science (there are several places in the middle of the article where I would have appreciated a citation) or with opposing points of view.  Her second paragraph appears utterly irrelevant to her thesis, and strangely unmoored in history (yes, shaving and enemas were discarded as useless for women in labor... decades ago).  This paragraph in particular bugged me:

Babies with very severe defects detectable by ultrasound usually have other defects as well, and survival rates are less than 50% even with early diagnosis and heroic costly prenatal interventions. For a good deal of money in the US, one can pay for surgery on the fetus during the pregnancy for the following findings, but there is also a 50% chance that the surgery will kill the fetus:

 

• Spina bifida—occurrence: 1/1428 pregnancies
• Absence of part or all of diaphragm—occurrence: 1/2200 pregnancies
• Bladder obstructions—occurrence: 1/4500 pregnancies
• Sacrococcygeal tumor—occurrence: 1/40,000 pregnancies
• Twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome—occurrence: 5% of monochorionic twins

I don't think it helps those families who experience these issues to write them off by saying that their kids wouldn't survive anyway, and there's no point to diagnosis.

My first pregnancy was a walk in the park, but mid-pregnancy ultrasound in my last pregnancy diagnosed placenta previa, and made a major difference in how I responded to events in my pregnancy, ultimately leading to much better outcomes for me and my daughter then might otherwise have been possible. 

Which brings us, I guess, to the second article, which I'm sorry to say I don't care for either.  Unsurprisingly, I'm particularly displeased with that author's paragraph about placenta previa.  I did spend my last pregnancy worrying about hemorrhage and c-section.  Both of those things actually happened to me.  Fortunately, ultrasound had indicated certain risk management measures in my pregnancy, which meant that the hemorrhage didn't happen until well after the point that my daughter had a good prognosis for NICU treatment (I jogged throughout my first pregnancy, and I shudder to think what would have happened if I'd done that with my last).  Also, because we knew that hemorrhage and c-section were a possibility, we were reasonably prepared.  It was stressful, yes, but ultimately, it was knowledge of my condition that helped us achieve a good outcome, and the stress of knowing that bad things could happen was not a factor.

The author of this second article has a very poor understanding of statistics, and consequently misinterprets some of the results under discussion.  She's also very dismissive of parental choice.

[eabbmom]

To each their own.

[Nazsmum]

My 3rd was "late" and the midwife WANTED an US...long story short. (1) baby was born under the weight the US said (2) baby born on the date I thought would be the date (3) midwife made me go for the US even after I told her insurance would NOT PAY!!!  I paid $$$$ out of pocket

I forgot to say...she made me go for a "DATE" which I did not want to begin with. One midwife told my one date and the other said "No way that could be right"  So she told me to stay with them I would have to go...well looking back I should have just left. Oh well. Live and learn.

[CountryMommy]

I have never had any early pregnancy ultrasounds but I always do the anatomy scan. I like to know where my placenta is, how the umbilical cord is inserted and if baby appears to be developing normally. Some things shown on the ultrasound can change how labour and delivery should proceed and if baby might need additional care after the birth.

 I personally wouldn't do any additional non diagnostic ultrasounds (for gender prediction, etc) but I would follow up with more medical ultrasounds if indicated, ei) vaginal bleeding, baby movement slowed down, etc. Also, I am not convinced that ultrasound is 100% safe but for me, doing at least the anatomy scan is a necessary calculated risk to learn potentially important information about the well being of my baby so I do it.

[Sphinxy]

Can someone tell me what the Doppler is? I'm unfamiliar with this procedure.

I was surprised at my first ultrasound this week. When I got in the exam room she told me it was done vaginally. I was expecting the ole "squeeze the jelly on your belly" thing that they show on tv.