Started By
Message

Experience with Ultrasound Findings?

Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:19 pm
Posted by HoustonTiger2008
Member since Feb 2015
631 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:19 pm
Anyone ever have an ultrasound that showed an echogenic focus? How did everything turn out for your baby?

ADMINS - Why is this thread anchored? I'm trying to get people to share experiences they have had to ease my mind. Not sure I see how there is something wrong with that.
This post was edited on 2/26/15 at 12:57 pm
Posted by Chad504boy
4 posts
Member since Feb 2005
166333 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:20 pm to
no idea what any of that means but wish your baby the best man.
Posted by CurDog
Member since Jan 2007
28082 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:25 pm to
how far along is she/or you?
Posted by HoustonTiger2008
Member since Feb 2015
631 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:26 pm to
Thanks man
Posted by HoustonTiger2008
Member since Feb 2015
631 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:27 pm to
22 weeks.
Posted by ashy larry
Marcy Projects
Member since Mar 2010
5568 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:29 pm to
quote:

22 weeks


Who performed the ultrasound? doctor or the technician?
Posted by CurDog
Member since Jan 2007
28082 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:29 pm to
my youngest (now 3) had these around the same time frame.
she was born at 35 weeks, but by week 30 they were gone(according to the ultrasounds and all test after)
Posted by HoustonTiger2008
Member since Feb 2015
631 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:32 pm to
And your daughter is a healthy girl at 3?

Just curious, how many did she have and where were they located?

Ours was found to be just an isolated intracardiac focus.
This post was edited on 2/26/15 at 12:35 pm
Posted by CurDog
Member since Jan 2007
28082 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:39 pm to
quote:

And your daughter is a healthy girl at 3?


healthy and a wild child

quote:

Ours was found to be just an isolated intracardiac focus.


same

obviously this needs to be looked at frequently , but (if memory serves me) they are small calcium deposits, that typically go away in the 3rd trimester
Posted by HoustonTiger2008
Member since Feb 2015
631 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:42 pm to
quote:

healthy and a wild child

Very glad to hear that.

quote:

obviously this needs to be looked at frequently

Our OB actually told us they don't even bother looking at it anymore. She said it might go away before birth, might not, but structurally won't effect anything. They just call it a "soft" marker for genetic abnormalities which is what has been worrisome for us. They said the chances of anything being wrong is very very low as my wife is younger than 30 years old.

I appreciate you talking about it. Trying to put my mind at ease.
Posted by Chipand2Putts
trembling hills
Member since Apr 2012
1359 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:48 pm to
If part of a constellation of abnormal findings, more concerning. If an isolated finding on an otherwise normal scan, not very concerning at all. Typically should have a follow up scan later in the pregnancy.
Rest easy. No guarantees in pregnancy (just like life), but everything is likely fine.
Posted by mahdragonz
Member since Jun 2013
6939 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:50 pm to
Where?

I just posted today in the if you've lost a child thread, but someone very close to me found out at 20 weeks that her baby had no brain or kidneys.

I am not sure of the echogenic focus, but I know there was a level two ultra sound that gave a more detailed understanding of how serious the condition was.

She made the brave decision to terminate at 23 weeks since there was no chance for her baby.

But she has gone on to have two healthy beautiful kids.

There are a lot of prenatal tests available that can give you peace of mind if you ask your doctor.
Posted by Chipand2Putts
trembling hills
Member since Apr 2012
1359 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:55 pm to
Comparing an echogenic focus with a major cranial defect and renal agenesis is like comparing a champaign popper with a nuke, not even in the same stratosphere.
OP, yo baby gonna be fine!
Posted by Chipand2Putts
trembling hills
Member since Apr 2012
1359 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:56 pm to
Maybe a more descriptive title will get anchor off this thread.
Posted by HoustonTiger2008
Member since Feb 2015
631 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 12:58 pm to
I was kinda thinking the same thing there, thanks for the words man, I really appreciate it!
Posted by Jack Daniel
In the bottle
Member since Feb 2013
25492 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 1:04 pm to
In the ultrasound we found out our baby had 3 legs. Turns out he just takes after his daddy.
Posted by ashy larry
Marcy Projects
Member since Mar 2010
5568 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 1:06 pm to
quote:

They just call it a "soft" marker for genetic abnormalities which is what has been worrisome for us. They said the chances of anything being wrong is very very low as my wife is younger than 30 years old.

I appreciate you talking about it. Trying to put my mind at ease.


I could tell you not to worry, but I know it won't do any good. But there are 2 key things to keep in mind with ultrasounds:
1) prenatal scans are designed to cast a wide net which results in a lot of false positives. basically their goal is look for anything and everything so it can be addressed as soon as possible IF necessary. This results in tons of people being scared shitless for no reason at all. I understand the necessity of this, but it doesn't make it any easier.
2) This may not apply to your situation, but ultrasonographer error is very common. There isn't really any licensing requirement to be an ultrasound technician to my knowledge. so unless a doctor or a very experienced tech is performing the ultrasound, there are often 'operator errors'.

I learned the above information first hand. During my wife's first pregnancy they found a marker for a chromosomal disorder in our child at the 20 week ultrasound. The ultrasound was performed on a Friday, and we were told the results immediately. We couldn't see a specialist for a second opinion until Monday at the earliest. This was a very long, tough weekend.

On the following Monday the specialist and his experienced ultrasonographer both ruled out any issues within minutes. The ultrasonographer showed my wife and I how the young girl performing the ultrasound a few days before screwed up. Apparently it's not that uncommon.

Our screening wasn't the "Echogenic Intracardiac Foci", but something they looked for at the same time. The shitty thing about all of this is the way the numbers can scare you. With the marker that was supposedly found we could have been 10 times more likely to have a kid with downs. Well, if my chances based on my wife's age, health, etc were 1 in 5,000 before the ultrasound, our chances now 'increased' to 1 in 500. I'll take those odds any day. You'd probably be very content If someone came to you before the pregnancy and said you'll have a 499 in 500 chance of having a healthy baby. But when a pregnant woman hears "you may be ten times more likely to have a child with a chromosomal disorder", it doesn't go over well.

tl;dr - had a similar result to a different test. baby was born healthy.
Posted by HoustonTiger2008
Member since Feb 2015
631 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 1:12 pm to
I agree with everything you said. This was actually a level 2 ultrasound with a high risk doctor because of something completely different and unrelated the first doctor thought they MIGHT have seen. This doctor immediately ruled that out, but did point this out to us. It was the high risk dr that actually pointed it out to us, so I'm confident that she was right, but she did say multiple times that no other markers were found and that this, by itself, is a very very soft marker.

They told us without any of the previous testing, based on age alone, our risk was like 1/850 and that doubled the risk, so maybe like .25%. But that is without any other testing done. We could have been in the same 1/5,000 type boat that you guys were in and this would bring it down to 1/2500.

Logically, I know the odds are very much in our favor that our baby boy will be fine and healthy, it's just so difficult to tell yourself that emotionally though.
Posted by hugo
CenLa
Member since Sep 2007
1081 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 1:31 pm to
With my son, they found something on theultrasound. Not sure if was the exact thing you mentioned, but said it was one of 5 or 7 markers for downs syndrome. We were sent to a place in Lafayette for a different type of ultrasound. They looked at everything and it turned out to be nothing. They can make you awfully nervous. My wife was a wreck for the week and a half we had to wait for that appt.
Posted by OysterPoBoy
City of St. George
Member since Jul 2013
35213 posts
Posted on 2/26/15 at 1:34 pm to
I don't know anything about it but I know how nervous I was for every ultrasound and we didn't have any issues.

I know the smallest thing would have driven me crazy.

Hope it's nothing, best of luck.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram