Ultrasound risk? I need links!

[ErinsJuneBug]

A good friend of mine is 22 weeks pregnant and has already had 6 ultrasounds. First she was bleeding, then they saw something on the baby's colon (which turned out to be nothing), then she needed a level II...its crazy. ANYWAY she just let me know that she needs ANOTHER because she has only gained 5 pounds so far, and they are worried that the baby isnt growing.

I belive i had read somewhere that ultrasounds can actually lead to smaller sized babies...is this correct? Does anyone have links?

My initial gut reaction is - what would they do anyway if the baby was on the small side? Nothing probubly - right?

-Erin

[onlyboys]

Actually, some providers recommend early birth if the baby isn't growing. They assume better out than in. I do not know if this is evidence based.

Sorry I don't have any links for you, but it seems like perhaps this wouldn't matter, anyway. This is pretty common--multiple U/S--and multiple bills to the insurance company.

[liseux]

I think if the u/s are really medically indicated than the benefits usually outweigh the risks. The question is whether they are really necessary in her case. If she feels better having them, she could ask for them to be very quick. Look, measure, done. If it really is a case of IUGR there isn't much that could be done at this point, except in rare cases.

I personally had about 8-10 u/s with my last 2 pregnancies & none with my first 2. All of my boys are very healthy (knock on wood). In my case I got rh sensitized after my second birth and I feel lucky that u/s (MCA doppler velocity u/s) is what's used now to measure anemia in preborn babies. 7 years ago the standard of care was serial amnios. So, that's where I'm coming from, I think her baby will probably be OK, even with many u/s.

[DoomaYula]

I've read that ultrasound changes development on a cellular level, but I don't know about size. I've also read that it can be linked to language delay.

I had about eleventy bazillion with my twin boys.

[Alison Cole]

I recently did a bit of a lit search on pub med, and the consensus seems to be that we don't really know the risks of u/s, if any. Some animal studies have shown possible issues, like the problems on the cellular level that YumaDoula mentioned, but really it seems like there's not been enough research done on the technology to say anything definitive about risks. Which is an issue in itself, I mean, our care providers are shooting these sound waves at our developing babies, and they don't even really know what effects that could have. That said, it is a technology that's in very wide use, and we're not seeing huge problems we can obviously link back to u/s exposure. So who knows? I myself am planning to limit u/s exposure this pg, just to be on the safe side, but then again, I am having the occasional cup of coffee and plate of sushi, which also may carry some risks. Ultimately, we all have to decide what risks we're willing to take on while we're pregnant, and I can't provide you with any smoking gun that says that one should limit u/s exposure, because as far as I can tell, it just isn't out there. Hope all is well with your friend.

A

[miriam]

There have been risks known about U/S for over twenty years and studies have been done worldwide.

The best advice is to use u/s only in cases where the benefits outweigh any known or unknown risks. Keep in mind that the internal and external monitors used during labor is also u/s and the doptone used to hear the fht at prenatal visits is also continuous wave u/s. Every pregnant woman and her baby get plenty of u/s exposure....but has it improved the outcomes? It has resulted in a generation of doctors who do not know how to palapate or estimate due dates.

[Alison Cole]

Miriam -- I'd love info on finding the study you're referring to. I really want to have something concrete to point to when people look at me like I'm a loony for not wanting u/s or doppler. TIA!

Erin -- I did find one study (here: http://www.ob-ultrasound.net/safenewn.htm) that showed a link between lots and lots of u/s and intra uterine growth restriction.

And here's one that shows that u/s doesn't improve outcomes: http://www.ob-ultrasound.net/safeewig.htm.

HTH!

[Genesis]

subbing in case anyone else has more info.

[ksera05]

IUGR can actually be very serious if they truly are suspecting that (I can't quite tell from what you've said). If hers are truly medically indicated the benefits outweigh the risks for her, anyway.

I mean, if she was just getting an u/s every appiontment for the fun of it, it might be worth saying something, but if she's actually got genuine reason for getting them, I'd stay out of it personally Just MHO though.