What was YOUR nuchal fold result/risk factor??

[Leemar]

Congratulations I am so happy everything is fine and a little boy too

[[M]umma[M]ia]

um mine came back 1:60900...and 1:800

im very happy with this but my bloods put me at a maternal age of 26 why is this??? seems i have bad blood....

[Kitt3n]

1/206.

CVS was all clear

[Chippy]

I'm confused by those super high numbers. On the little graph I have, no one goes above 1:6000.

My T21 results were 1:4730 which gives me a maternal age of less than 15. I'm 29. I don't know what the others are but I'm assuming they're good 'cos they would have told me otherwise.

[Mumof2Girls]

For Jen (when I was 30) I had a result of 1:217 and for this bub (I'm 33 now) I had a risk of 1:136. Both scans were fine but it was the bloods that went crazy. The genetic counsellor said that some women have a bit of a different blood chemistry which give the high risk results. Anyway, had a CVS with Jen and she was perfectly fine and had an amnio with this one and he's perfectly fine too

[HotI]

Not sure how high it goes up to but anything under 1/300 is considered high risk and further investigations should be carried out.

It is your choice whether to have a NT measurement +/- maternal blood tests, just as it your choice to have or not have further testing. Doctors may encourage you to have further testing but it should be your decision and at a time when you are comfortable with it.

The 1/300 risk being "high risk" is based on the predicted incidence of miscarriage following the next round of testing (CVS or amnio) and cost-benefit calculations. There is no medical reason why this 1/300 figure is used.

Like this thread shows, one risk value can be interpreted in different ways by different people based on their circumstances. To some the value will seem really high, to others the same value will be low.

[*Efjay*]

mine was 1 in 3000 from the scan then bloods put me at 1 in 16,000

[Jac]

I'm confused by those super high numbers. On the little graph I have, no one goes above 1:6000.

My T21 results were 1:4730 which gives me a maternal age of less than 15. I'm 29. I don't know what the others are but I'm assuming they're good 'cos they would have told me otherwise.

How unusual (your graph that is). Results from both of my pregnancies have been well above 1 in 6000 (over the age of 30 each time) so they most certainly can go above the upper limit on your graph. Weird ha? I'm pretty sure that I was not given a maternal age of less that 15 either, despite have a greater ratio than yours. Can't explain it though?

ETA : Unless your graph give scan results only (not combined results from blood test AND scan)?

[SSmiles]

My results for this bub were 1:6200 (ish)...but it was 1:300 before the blood test results where added (I'm 34)... I can't remember what it was with DS?!?!

[pollyanna]

Hi girls,
My test results came back today for the ultrasound for nuchal translucency and combined maternal serum testing for first trimester. i'm so ecstatic with the results. mind you the songrapher said that my nuchal fold risk was minimal so that helped alay any fears.I'm nearly 38 and and my combined risk for trisomy 21 is 1 in 3,930 and my combined risk for trisomy 18 is 1 in 10,100. I am so relieved, i never thought i'd have any chance of getting numbers that high at my age-just the same its put a smile on my dial. hope everyone else is getting good numbers.