| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
emz 
Senior Member
Joined: 25 November 2006
Location: Christchurch
Points: 5321
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Topic: EDD: Scan vs LMP?
Posted: 27 November 2007 at 3:34pm |
|
I've had 3 EDD's this pregnancy from my own estimate, LMP and a scan. Now after a growth scan yesterday, I'm wondering if they actually got it right at the 12 week scan as my baby has a head measuring 3 weeks ahead of his body (and I assume the head would be the best measure of gestation?) Head was measured at 36w, body between 32 and 34, with an average of 33w.
Should I bring this up with the midwife? My main concerns are:
-That baby should be measuring all over at at least 34w4d, so maybe he's not getting the amount of nutrients he needs? He's been underaverage in size (leg and arm wise etc) since 27 weeks
-That if I go 2 weeks over my EDD (which was pushed back from 15/12 to 4/1/08) and therefore have to push out a really REALLY big head!
Anyone else have similar experiences or can just offer some advice?
Edited by emz
|
 |
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
MILF
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: Antarctica/Invercargill ;)
Points: 1988
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 November 2007 at 4:03pm |
|
the most accurate scan is when baby is between 10-12 weeks gestation. after that it gets harder to date babies age as they all grow at different rates. i would have thought your midwife would have taken the edd from the 12 week scan as accurate. LMP is not infalliable, as it could be 2-3 weeks out, depending on when you ovulated and baby implanted.
|
Lyla - mum to
Xanthe -  my big 4 year old 
and
Jordis - 1 year old 
|
|
Mama2two
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: Whangaparaoa
Points: 2835
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 November 2007 at 4:06pm |
I know that the early scans are supposed to be the most accurate, but it really does depend on the person doing it. We had continuous problems in the same area when I was pregnant with Samantha. Our LMP gave us a date of 28th April but the scans gave us 2nd May, 5th May and 7th May  My m/w wanted to go by the 5th May and my concern was going over as well and that Sam could have been well overcooked by then. As with yours Sams measurements never added up and bits of her were always measuring ahead or behind her EDD.
In the end she came naturally on the 27th April, pretty much bang on my EDD by LMP.
Try not to worry too much, remember only 3% of babies come on their due dates anyway.
Perhaps request a scan at 37-38 weeks and if the head is measuring really big discuss the options with your m/w then.
|
|
|
|
ElfsMum
Senior Member
Joined: 04 June 2007
Location: Christchurch
Points: 11702
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 November 2007 at 4:08pm |
|
yep i assume you are having lots of scans? i would have no idea how my baby measures except the FH that the midwife measures(3cm ahead) but at every scan hes measured ahead except the very first one at 6 weeks... infuriatingly she goes by that one..instead of the others (but at least there is only five days difference.. ) she just keeps telling me the very earliest scan(in my case at 6 weeks) is the one they go on even though i know i implanted and ovulated early..
i would assume the mw would have said if she thought that was an issue..but i would ask her anyway (and i used to ask the scan people lots of questions too)
|
|
Mum to two amazing boys!
|
|
emz
Senior Member
Joined: 25 November 2006
Location: Christchurch
Points: 5321
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 November 2007 at 4:29pm |
I'm having scans every 2 weeks from now on. My only issue is that I've been given the all clear to go on holiday from the 21st-26th Dec (4 hours from Chch) with my EDD being 4.1.08. But if there's a chance that my EDD is actually earlier I don't really think it's worth risking it. Maybe I'll just have to try everything to get this wee one out anyway?! 
|
|
ElfsMum
Senior Member
Joined: 04 June 2007
Location: Christchurch
Points: 11702
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 November 2007 at 5:21pm |
|
wow you are keen...i wouldnt risk being that far away even with the due date being 4th jan...:) i think trying everything would be the best option:) !
|
|
Mum to two amazing boys!
|
|
cuppatea
Senior Member
Joined: 05 February 2007
Points: 7798
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 November 2007 at 5:22pm |
|
I was told by midwife that the 12 weeks scan is the most accurate as up until then they all grow at the same rate, after that growth scans are just done to makes sure bubs is growing and not to estimate an EDD (although they do). My m/w thought I was ahead and went back and checked the 12 weeks scan to see what that said and was happy to then just go by that.
I think it is also normal for different bits of bubs to vary. A friend at ante natal has a baby whose head is on the 95th percentile but weight and height is on the 50th. So long as your baby is increasing in size everywhere at each scan I don't think their would be any nutrient problems etc.
|
|
|
|
peachy
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: Auckland
Points: 3923
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 November 2007 at 5:44pm |
|
emz Lauren was on the 95th centile for her head and tummy the whole way through my pregnancy and I had heaps of scans with her. I used to worry myself sick that something was wrong, everytime I went for a scan they changed my EDD and I was pretty stressed about it.
At the end of the day, she was born in proportion, all those measurements were forgotten and all my worrying was unnecessary! I have since learn't that scans are not 100% accurate and can be out by atleast 1kg when giving you an estimated birth weight!
I say sit back and enjoy the ride, I am sure your baby is perfectly healthy, they would say so if there was something out of the norm!
|
|
|
|
Lisha
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Location: Christchurch
Points: 2031
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 November 2007 at 6:28pm |
We were given 2 EDD's, the 25th Nov from the scans and 28th Nov from my MW.. I have gone for the 25th, hence the fact that I am 2 days over.
Also the weight of the baby is freaking me out,
10 1/2 lb +, so everyday that I am going over, how big will the baby be in the end?!?!?!
|
|
|
|
MonicaMouse
Senior Member
Joined: 22 February 2007
Points: 1643
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 November 2007 at 7:18pm |
|
I was 95% sure of my dates and was looking foward to a 10/10 delivery. Our initial scan gave us a EDD of 15/10, and as they went on the moved closer to the start of October. My MW arranged a scan for us at 32.5 weeks as I had lost weight (back to my 9 week weight) and I did not look like I was having a baby in just over 7 weeks. All bar his femur were above average - and his head was ahead of the others as well (not a comforting thought for a first time mum-to-be. Our EDD from that scan was 1/10. As it turned out our young man arrived on 15/10 - yup the EDD from our first scan. I know it doesn't always happen that way, but it was interesting that it happened that way
|
Blair 15/10/2007
Daniel 30/07/2009
|
|
caitlynsmygirl
Senior Member
Joined: 01 January 1900
Points: 8777
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 November 2007 at 9:05pm |
|
my edd according to my lmp was 31st of May, according to my first scan it was 7th of June and when i had another scan at 36 weeks (cos i had gastroentiritis and was bored in hospital so bugged them to give me a scan) my edd was 2nd of june
Caitlyn was born on the 8th, but the mw thought she was a bit EARLY cos she had heaps of vernix on her,was very confusing!
|
|
EDD: Scan vs LMP?
