This section is for discussions with other women who have probably been through the same signs/symptoms that you may be experiencing. Please note, we cannot offer medical advice and encourage members to discuss their concerns with their doctors. New members, come on in and introduce yourself!
User avatar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10203
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 637032 6:26 pm


Postby caryn » Wed Sep 15, 638619 9:31 pm

Becky, I'm wondering if they might not have changed the diagnosis based on some of the things that they know about preeclampsia. It's known to go along with shallow implantation of the placenta, especially in first pregnancies, that can compromise fetal growth. When the placenta runs short of oxygen is when the maternal symptoms appear, but before that, lower than average blood flow can grow a smaller baby.

It's also thought to be the case, in all pregnancies, that the mother's body and the placenta spend the whole time negotiating over the size of the baby. It's a targeting problem -- the baby has to be big enough to thrive after delivery, but small enough to fit out -- so they also explain the occurence of preeclampsia in pregnancies where the baby is *large* as being caused by placental hypoxia, when the baby outstrips the ability of the placenta to provide it with blood.

So I guess I'm wondering if they're not just calling your daughter "growth restricted" simply because it's almost a definition of preeclampsia, even with the larger babies?

Registered User
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 638613 4:27 am


Postby chippery » Sat Sep 04, 638619 5:24 pm

My first had the restriction, 5th percentile. The one I'm currently carrying is around the 90th percentile! I asked if restriction may be an issue with this one, and the answer was "No, because we don't worry about it until hitting the 10th percentile or steady decline."

When I asked about the margin of error, they said it can be 10%.

Forum Moderator
Posts: 6614
Joined: Mon May 24, 637649 9:37 am
Location: Midland, TX


Postby kara » Sat Sep 04, 638619 4:43 pm

Hi Becky,

I'm so sorry to hear of the loss of your daughter, Addison. I'm glad you've found us.

To be considered growth restricted (by the books) a baby must be below the 10th %tile. Now, she could have had asymetrical IUGR...meaning some part of her was small or growth restricted compared to other parts of her - for a 27 week baby. Often times it is the head or abdomen that are smaller, though it can be the limbs, too. A 27 weeker should be around 2 lbs. But half a pound at that small size, is significant.

Typically parents height isn't taken too much into consideration.... I have big friends that have had small babies and vice versa. We can't say why your doctor would change his tune...but there must be something that has convinced him.

I think if it is important to you, you should have a conference call with the doctor. Explain that you didn't understand what he said about Addison being IUGR, and ask him to go over it again...what was her percetile, how does that make her IUGR, what evidence leads them to that diagnosis. Tell him you need to feel like you have a grasp on what happened, and I'll bet he will oblige.

You can google "27 week pregnancy" to find several sites that show weights for gestational age.

Registered User
Posts: 1000
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 638616 12:33 pm
Location: Pulaski, VA


Postby atvlady » Sat Sep 04, 638619 11:37 am

Hello and sorry for your loss. I gave birth to our daughter in June and lost her to severe premanturity due to HELLP and pre-e. When I saw my MFM, twice before I had her, both visits they said "she looks healthy and is growing very well." Well when I had her she was HALF the weight they tought she was. She was only 6.8 ounces and 9 inches. My husband and I are both tall. I was told by nurses and drs when I was in the hospital, after I gave birth to her, that she should have been 10-12 ounces or more. Noone has officaily labeled her as IUGR. I see my MFM Aug 3 and I am like you, I am going to ask questions. I would like to see also if anyone on here has any "link" that shows how much weight range a baby should be gestationaly. There is a website that has your pregnancy week for week and tells an approximate weight the baby should be for that week but it is not a "mecial" website. I am not sure if I am permitted to show that link on here. Maybe one of the mods will be by sometime shortly to permit me. Hope this helps. Take care and again, sorry for your loss.

Registered User
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 638607 11:12 am


Postby 2rebecca » Sat Sep 04, 638619 2:00 am

In my last pregnancy I lost my daughter in March at 27 weeks due to severe PE. She weighed 1 lb 7 oz. A few days prior to the delivery my MFM estimated her weight to be 1.5 lbs which put her in the 22-percentile. At that time he said he wasn’t concerned because some babies are just small and it could be genetics. (I’m 5’1” and my husband is 6’2”.) He said he would be concerned if she were below the 10th percentile or if her growth started dropping off.

Well, I had my WWW meeting and preconception meeting with my MFM & OB a couple of weeks ago. At that meeting they referred to my daughter as Growth Restricted. When we questioned them about why they are now considering her IUGR, they basically said well, knowing what we know now we consider her to have been IUGR, especially with your husband’s height. Is it normal for doctors to change their mind on something like this AFTER delivery and only account for the fathers height and not the mothers? What criteria do your doctors use to define IUGR?

Return to “Ask the Experienced”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests