Hello, all.
I saw the perinatologist (Dr. Donna Dizon-Townsend) again
yesterday. The short version is that the baby is growing, but still not as fast
as she should. I get 3 more weeks of bed rest and twice a week non-stress
tests. After that, I will see Dr. Dizon-Townsend again, and most likely she
will recommend that I have the baby then. If that is the case, then we will be
having another late May Birthday in the family! 
Ellie’s birthday is May
27th, Scott’s birthday is May 24th.
Keep reading if you are interested
in the long version…
The fluid measurements have been kind of a roller
coaster this week. Last Friday (April 28) it was 12.6. Tuesday it was 7.6.
Yesterday, measured at two different times, it was 11-something, then
9-something. 9-something was the number that got charted and seemed, in Dr.
Townsend’s opinion, to likely be the most accurate. I tend to agree with her.
Also the non-stress tests Tuesday and yesterday were both good.
Andrea’s
head size is still the main concern. As I said before, she is growing, but is
still losing a little ground from the growth curve that we would like to see her
on. The good news is that her cerebellum looked good this time, versus the
concern that it was too small inside her already too small head three weeks
ago. Doc also spotted some other important formations on the brain that she was
unable to spot last time. What were they? I can’t remember now. Sorry. But I
do remember that she said it was a good thing. Doc rechecked all the other
organs as well — heart, kidneys, bladder, blood flow, placenta, etc — and saw
a lot of other good things on the ultrasound. There was nothing else to
indicate any problems.
Another issue yesterday was a possible CMV
(cytomegalovirus) infection. This it the viral infection that I have mentioned
before as one possible cause for Andrea’s slowed growth. My OB (Dr. Donna
Wylie) read my lab data to mean that I have been infected with CMV in the past,
but it was prior to the pregnancy, and therefore not a concern. However, Dr.
Townsend isn’t so sure the data definitively indicates that. I am going in on
Monday to have more blood drawn. Comparing the two sets of data will give a
better indication of how long ago I may have had CMV. If it was during the
pregnancy, it is a definite concern.
The vast majority of people get
CMV before adulthood, and after having it once, are immune to it. Often there
are no symptoms to indicate you ever caught it, but if symptoms do show up, they
look like a common cold, sometimes with a bit of a fever. (Not an unusual
occurrence during childhood, and not dangerous.) Occasionally, someone manages
to not get it earlier in life, and may
get CMV during childbearing years. Still more rare is for it happen when a
woman is actually pregnant. 1% of babies in the United States are born with a
CMV infection that was passed to them by their mother during pregnancy. When a
baby is born with CMV, it’s called congenital CMV. Of that 1% with congenital
CMV, 10% have complications or abnormalities at birth or a few years down the
road. There are a wide range of possible complications, most relating to the
central nervous system, and complications can be mild to severe. The other 9
out of 10 seem to have no problems from their prenatal exposure.
The
odds of CMV being the problem with Andrea are slim, but not impossible. An
amnio would show us if she’s got it, but as was the case 3 weeks ago, due to the
amount of fluid and position of the placenta, there is no good way to get in and
draw amniotic fluid without taking undue risk for causing further
complications. So, we are back to the “wait and see” thing. Just as is the
case with drawing amniotic fluid to screen for a genetic abnormality, knowing
she has CMV doesn’t change the course of action now. It only provides us with
info on a course of action to take after she is born. She can be quickly
evaluated for both possibilities after she is born with zero risk to her, so
that seems like the smart choice.
