Down Syndrome would be the best and worst of the positive test outcomes. It is survivable, often. Kid with DS function in society, sometimes. Aside from major structural defects though, you never know how your kid is going to be affected. Grey area.
I spoke with midwife while I was at work on Tuesday. She had had time to review the scans from the NT scan and said the following:
They took four measures of the NT: the first two were the standard magnification and the other 2 were magnified in such a way that they generally don't read the results from. The normally magnified first two were 1.4 and 1.5 . The magnified two were larger, 2.2 and 2.4 but when she measured the NT herself (which I was on the phone and the image from the scan was on the screen) she got 1.9 on the one that was 2.2. The standard way to give the NT is a average of three measures. Even taking the average of the smallest one and the two largest (the two with non-standard magnification and the larger of the two normally imaged ones) the average is 2.0 not 2.1. Not a big difference, but just shows there was so measurement error here.
Then she said that there was a processing error for my Panorama. Results should have been processed but they weren't. They were going to rush the results. Should have them by the end of the week.
I almost asked for a CVS.
I spoke with midwife while I was at work on Tuesday. She had had time to review the scans from the NT scan and said the following:
They took four measures of the NT: the first two were the standard magnification and the other 2 were magnified in such a way that they generally don't read the results from. The normally magnified first two were 1.4 and 1.5 . The magnified two were larger, 2.2 and 2.4 but when she measured the NT herself (which I was on the phone and the image from the scan was on the screen) she got 1.9 on the one that was 2.2. The standard way to give the NT is a average of three measures. Even taking the average of the smallest one and the two largest (the two with non-standard magnification and the larger of the two normally imaged ones) the average is 2.0 not 2.1. Not a big difference, but just shows there was so measurement error here.
Then she said that there was a processing error for my Panorama. Results should have been processed but they weren't. They were going to rush the results. Should have them by the end of the week.
I almost asked for a CVS.
Waiting. Tuesday, Wednesday and into Thursday morning. My phone rang while I was in a company meeting with the midwife's name Thursday afternoon. I excused myself and answered it.
The Panorama results were normal.
Low risk across the board and 99% accurate.
Looks like I just might be having a healthy , 46X? Baby after all.
Hub told me he's getting attached to take two.
All is well- finally.
I Don't Wanna Take Advice From Fools
I'll just figure everything is cool
Until I hear it from you
The Gin Blossoms, Advice from Fools
Yay! Great news! I just knew it! Now I suppose it's time to write a serious complaint letter about that Dr. to her hospital/practice!
ReplyDeleteI am so happy for you and your hubs! I have been following your blog and hoping for this. I thought a 2.1 nuchal measurement was in range. That doctor never should have scared you like that.
ReplyDelete