For all you ladies out there that were told you were have a HUGE baby - Im interested in what your growth scan measurements were and then what bub was actually born at?
I know these scans are notorious for being wrong - so just want to get a feel for it!
So growth scan today was @ 37 weeks 1 day by hossy dates...
Head = 41 weeks
Belly = 42 weeks
Legs = 43 weeks
What were your measurements (if you can remember!!) and what was bub actually born at??
At my 36 week scan with DS1 I was told he was measuring at 40-41 weeks for everything and his approximate current weight was estimated at 8lb 15oz, but that he isn't a 'big' baby just very long and large head
He was induced at 41+3 and was 10lb 4oz or 4.64kg
HC 38.5cm
Length was measured at 59cm twice by the midwife but 55cm 2 days later
At about 32weeks Nate had a 36week belly and 38 week head and legs. They estimated at that time he weighed 7lb1 (which was the same as Darcy at birth).
He was born at 39weeks weight 4110gm or 9lb1 with a 51cm length and head circ of 37cm, so pretty average actually.
DS always measured exactly 2 weeks ahead on all scans from 13wks onwards.
They said he'd be around the 4kg mark at 40wks, but was born at 41+5 weighing 8Ib3oz or 3.774kg, length 51cm, hc 34cm
My growth scan on monday showed that Little Miss was only measuring at 35+5 as an overall measurement (I was 35+1 on the day).
Legs - 37+5
Head - 34+5
Belly - 35+5
Not what I was expecting with having GD this time around.
Growth scans can be really inaccurate, but a bit of a guide is that if the measurements are all similar, ie all measuring 2 weeks ahead and not all different, it is more likely to be accurate. The genetics of the parents come into play the further into the pregnancy, so if dad has a big head then baby might too or if mum is long and lean baby might be too. So this effects growth scan measurements. Also the skill of the sonographer and the body habitus of the patient play a role in the accuracy.
I don't know actual sizes, but I was told DD#2 was going to be tiny. She was going to be much smaller that DD#1 who came in at 3.4kgs.
It the bigging of my preg they put my dates back as they said bub was too small to be as far along as I knew I was.. It worked itself out by my 13 week scan so OB went with that scan rather than the early one. 19 week scan once again I was told bub was small and may very well be late. DD#2 was born on the EDD calculated from my LMP and wasn't tiny, a good size really a perfect 7lbs.
I really don't take any notice of them at all.
GL with these final weeks!
I was told dd1 was tiny, and I needed to go on bed rest as she was too small and about 4 weeks behind. She was born at 34 weeks, 2.75kgs, the biggest premmie in the scn.
With Dd2 I had gd and was told she was big, even at the dating scan. She came at 37 weeks and was 3.5kg so not so big.
Ds they told me he was big and they got that was the only one they got right. He was 4.45kg at 39 weeks.
I had one on Friday so am interested also. At 32+3 he is measuring overall 34+1 so not too far ahead, tho head is measuring 313mm and 35+ 3 (eek) estimated right now to be 2.4kg on the 92nd percentile apparently that is a "large baby". I'm not too worried growth scans can be a bit hit and miss. I'm just hoping to avoid the "big baby, need induction" garbage!!
My scan measurements and fundal height etc said a baby of about 9pounds or more. He came out as 7pounds! Had to rush out and buy 'tiny baby' size clothes as we had bought for a big baby!
I know I didn't have a big baby, but when I had my final growth scan at 33+5 they said DD was at the 30 week mark, at 2lb 10oz.
She was delivered at 34+1 (3 days later) at 3lb 12oz. And she hadn't grown in over a week.
Registered User
Growth Scan Size V's Actual Sizes.
anyone else had one recently and got their actual bubba size to compare?
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks