Mothering › Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Rhogam
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rhogam - Page 2  

post #21 of 35
Even if you are totally sure that this is your last baby (ie you are getting a tubal ligation), I would still get the shot. My understanding is that being sensitized can cause problems if you are ever involved in an organ transplant... I think the deal is that you can't donate your organs. Probably far from your minds, but on the off-chance that my child needed my kidney, I'd feel pretty crappy about it if I couldn't do that because I refused postpartum Rhogam. I realize it is kind of a long shot that you'll be involved in an organ transplant, but you know what is an even longer long shot? Having a problem from postpartum Rhogam.
post #22 of 35
Thank you to those who offered their perspective. I actually am not overly worried about this pregnancy, despite how it may have sounded. However, I was high risk before (multiple losses, pre-term birth, blood clotting problem, one baby who was IUGR/low birth weight, etc), and really this was the last thing I needed to add on top of everything.

My hospital WILL risk me out at 1:4. They can only handle very low risk deliveries there, and as it is I'm on the border of being risked out anyway. They do no deliveries before 36 weeks, they cannot do exchange transfusions, they cannot intubate or vent, and none of the nurses on the mother infant floor will do IV's because they refuse to do baby care. They rely on the Peds for that, and luckily they have one Ped who can do it. Placing IV's in babies is not something most Dr's are trained to do.

Spark, your list sounds nice, but I was sensitized during my pregnancy, so none of that would have mattered. I was tested in the first trimester and it was neg, and then tested when I went in to deliver and suddenly I was sensitized. I had no signs at all. No amnio, no bleeding, nothing.

The thing is, and this is just my opinion, but if you are wanting to avoid rhogam to avoid interventions, well, the interventions you get when you become sensitized are much more invasive, and, well, sucky. I don't mind so much the extra testing for myself, and I researched this up the wazoo, so I had already made my decisions about what my care should be before I even saw an OB. Her recommendations were the same, BTW. But what really bugs me is not taking my baby home right away. Who wants to spend the first several days or week of their new baby's life staring at them while they are under billi lights? And I have other kids I would be away from. And think about all of the heel sticks, too. Jaundiced baby's are so sleepy, also, that they are really hard to breastfeed. My oldest, who was also a preemie, was so tired that she didn't nurse until she was 6 weeks old. We were dripping breastmilk into her mouth for feeds, and if they are not eating it is hard to clear the billi.

IMO this is what preventative medicine is all about. You choose one intervention to hopefully prevent other more invasive interventions and complications. There will always be anecdotal evidence from people who have never gotten rhogam and never got sensitized, or people who got it and were sensitized as well. But when you look at the literature, seeing patients who are sensitized to anti-D has become more and more uncommon, thanks to rhogam.
post #23 of 35
Yeah, it's funny that while the anti-D cases are falling, the seems to be a rise in sensitization of the other groups (anti-C/c, anti-E/e, anti-S/s, Kell, etc.). I wonder what's up with that and if screening will take more of a priority...I've heard from a few moms now that were sensitized to C/c through blood transfusions, one even suspects through an IUT, so she had not only D to worry about but C as well. Of course that's just the tip of the iceberg with blood product issues etc.

Yeah, the jaundice isn't pleasant but our perspective is different. I don't mind her being under the lights and away from us for a week or two if it means a healthy child at the end of it all. I've seen the end result--my healthy and amazing 3 year old-- and it was all worth it. And I lived on site that whole time (in the NICU Mom's dorm), and that part was awful (just being away from hubby for that week and feeling pretty isolated) but like I said, all worth it in the end.
post #24 of 35
I know this has probably been posted elsewhere, but thought I'd repost some food for thought about rhogam...

http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic/rhogam_wcp.htm

Quote:
Pregnancy Category C
Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with RhoGAM or MICRhoGAM. The available evidence suggests that Rho(D) Immune Globulin (Human) does not harm the fetus or affect future pregnancies or the reproduction capacity of the maternal recipient.18,19
So, studies not done, but they think it's OK.

Quote:
RhoGAM and MICrhoGAM are made from human plasma. Because these products are made from human blood, they may carry a risk of transmitting infectious agents, e.g. viruses, and theoretically the Creutzfeld-Jakob disease agent. The risk that such products will transmit an infectious agent has been reduced by screening plasma donors for prior exposure to certain viruses, by testing for the presence of certain current virus infections and by removing certain viruses during the manufacturing process...
Despite these measures, such products can still potentially transmit disease. There is also the possibility that unknown infectious agents may be present in such products.
I was also looking at some info on Hep C transmission with immunoglobulin cases in the 70s and 90s, which was very interesting...
post #25 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by japonica View Post
Yeah, it's funny that while the anti-D cases are falling, the seems to be a rise in sensitization of the other groups (anti-C/c, anti-E/e, anti-S/s, Kell, etc.). I wonder what's up with that and if screening will take more of a priority....
From what I've read, it's not that there's more of us, it's just that they see us more now than they see anti-D because of rhogam. So, let's say that an OB in a year would see 5 minor blood group insensitivities (C, S, kell, etc) and 100 D's. Now they are seeing 1 D sensitivity and 5 of the others. So it seems like more. Does that make sense?

I agree that a healthy baby is what really matters, which is why I may grumble about it, but I'll do it. I'm just one of those people who hates to be messed with, and once I have the baby I feel great and just want to get home, KWIM? I know I must deliver in the hospital because of my high risk stuff, and my deliveries have been great, so I'm OK with it. But pp care BUGS me. A lot.
post #26 of 35
I got the shot with all 3 of my kids. My Dr.'s told me it was very important I get it and I had no choice.
post #27 of 35
What do you mean, you had no choice?
post #28 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by momileigh View Post
What do you mean, you had no choice?
I think she means her doctors told her she had no choice.
post #29 of 35
I have had two iso pregnancies (i have the anti-kell antibody, which there is no shot for). My first was born at 40 weeks, spent three days under the lights at the hospy and then we used a biliblanket at home for a week. My second was born at 37w 3d and didn't spend any time under the lights at all.

Slightly OT, but Serenity, perhaps you could arrange something so that your babies could be with you while on the lights. I just held my little one naked under the lights those first few days in the hospital. I was really really tired of blue lights by the time it was over, but it was better than watching him lay in a bassinette.
post #30 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by japonica View Post
Yeah, it's funny that while the anti-D cases are falling, the seems to be a rise in sensitization of the other groups (anti-C/c, anti-E/e, anti-S/s, Kell, etc.). I wonder what's up with that and if screening will take more of a priority...I've heard from a few moms now that were sensitized to C/c through blood transfusions, one even suspects through an IUT, so she had not only D to worry about but C as well.
I was sensitized to Kell through a transfusion. It's not screened for, and if you aren't already sensitized it won't show up on a type & cross.

In my last pregnancy, I chose to have RhoGAM, at 28 weeks, after an MVA @ 30 weeks, and after delivery.

I am planning another isoimmunized pregnancy after a lengthy discussion with my OB and perinate. My titers are currently lower than they were when I was diagnosed (untiterable right now, in fact!) and never got above 1:8, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
post #31 of 35
Quote:
I was sensitized to Kell through a transfusion. It's not screened for, and if you aren't already sensitized it won't show up on a type & cross.
That's what I'm hearing more and more often...getting sensitized through transfusions. I imagine it's not easy, simple, or cheap to screen for these antigens before transfusing, but I almost wish they could set out a protocol whereby women of a specific age group (ie. not done childbearing) could be screened for some of the major antigens that could cause HDN before getting these transfusions. I know the powers that be would balk at the expense and extra work, but would it be cheaper on the health care system than the extra cost of all the MCA dopplers, IUTs, BPPs, hospital stays (for mom and baby), NICU stays etc.
post #32 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by japonica View Post
That's what I'm hearing more and more often...getting sensitized through transfusions. I imagine it's not easy, simple, or cheap to screen for these antigens before transfusing, but I almost wish they could set out a protocol whereby women of a specific age group (ie. not done childbearing) could be screened for some of the major antigens that could cause HDN before getting these transfusions. I know the powers that be would balk at the expense and extra work, but would it be cheaper on the health care system than the extra cost of all the MCA dopplers, IUTs, BPPs, hospital stays (for mom and baby), NICU stays etc.
Really, it's not even that many that would need screening. I don't worry about most of the "minor" antigens, but Kell, Rh-D, and one or two others that can cause moderate to severe HDN don't seem excessive to screen for.
post #33 of 35
Can you tell me how it works when you get sensitized through a transfusion? My dh is kell+ and i got sensitized during my c-section with my first. Even though he is heterozygous, all my babies have been kell+ and i make the antibody. It hasn't "seen" them very early though, even though it is an agressive antibody
post #34 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by milkydoula View Post
Can you tell me how it works when you get sensitized through a transfusion? My dh is kell+ and i got sensitized during my c-section with my first. Even though he is heterozygous, all my babies have been kell+ and i make the antibody. It hasn't "seen" them very early though, even though it is an agressive antibody
My transfusion donor was Kell positive. I'm Kell neg, as 90% of the population is, so when I received the transfusion, I got a whole load of Kell antigen. My body then made the antibodies.

My DH is Kell homozygous positive. So our babies are all Kell positive. Does this make sense?
post #35 of 35
bumping up
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Birth and Beyond
This thread is locked  
Mothering › Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Rhogam