Re: active tracing with decell
From: Richard Chudacoff (rchudacoff@mylinuxisp.com)
Wed Dec 19 10:45:01 2007
Louana
Great question. My last IUFD was in 1990, and my last delivery was in April
2007. I go with the former
--
Richard Chudacoff, MD, FACOG
Las Vegas International Center for Advanced Gynecologic Care
(Specializing in minimally and non-invasive surgery)
2481 Professional Court
Las Vegas, NV 89128
TEL: 702-485-8893
FAX: 702-974-0945
www.lasvegasgyncenter.com <http://www.lasvegasgyncenter.com/>
The information in this e-mail may be confidential and/or privileged. If you
are not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination
or copying of this e-mail and its attachments, if any, or the information
contained herein is prohibited. If you have received the e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail or phone and delete
this e-mail. Thank you.
_____
From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of
westsidebirthservice@juno.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 6:49 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L
Subject: Re: active tracing with decell
Could be true knot that isn't fatal. Your'e going to deliver "just in
case?"
Just wondering where the dividing line is between the "every birth is a
disaster waiting to happen and can't be diagnosed as normal until after the
event" and "birth is a natural event with some fatal outcomes due to
(someties cord) accidents." And what of the sequela of delivering a preterm
baby because of the fear of a fatal cord accident?
Louana
-- Joe <forcep@intercom.net> wrote:
Excellent point, Dan. Could have true knot which could be fatal. Joe C
R. Daniel Braun wrote:
> That makes no sense at all. If you have cord entanglement theoretically
> it could at any time become so severe that it kills the baby. So
> logically you have to either monitor her continuously until delivery or
> ignore it. NST's and CST's don't predict anything about cord problems,
> only about UPI. Therefore they are of no benefit.
>
> IMHO
> Dan
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 8:05 PM, Raymond Stephen
> <Stephen.Raymond@dhhs.tas.gov.au
> <mailto:Stephen.Raymond@dhhs.tas.gov.au>> wrote:
>
> And, you're going to mess up her sugars. Ask yourself shy she had the
> deceleration - can't be placental insufficiency, no IUGR, so it has to
> be an intermittent cord compression,? entanglement, probably won't
> happen again, why not just check CTG regularly?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net <mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net>
> [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net <mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net>] On Behalf Of
> Richard Chudacoff
> Sent: Wednesday, 19 December 2007 11:51 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L
> Subject: RE: active tracing with decell
>
> That is true, especially in this case with GDM. But hey, that is why I
> don't
> deliver anymore
>
> Richard Chudacoff, MD, FACOG
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net <mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net>
> [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net <mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net>] On Behalf Of
Dr.
> John
> Provatopoulos B.Sc. M.D.C.M. F.R.S.C.
> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 4:42 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L
> Subject: Re: active tracing with decell
>
> At Tue, 18 Dec 2007, Richard Chudacoff wrote:
> >
> >Steroids in the 34th week? Isn't that too late?
> >
> >--
> >Richard Chudacoff, MD, FACOG
> >
> 34 wks is on the border for celestone, the problem with 34 wk
delievery
> is chance of resp support for a few days is significant. Would I
fault
> anyone for delievery, no, especially if that's what the mom wants
after
> explaining the risks.
>
> --
> Take care, John
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
>
> The information in this transmission may be confidential and/or
> protected by legal professional privilege, and is intended only for
> the person or persons to whom it is addressed. If you are not such a
> person, you are warned that any disclosure, copying or dissemination
> of the information is unauthorised. If you have received the
> transmission in error, please immediately contact this office by
> telephone, fax or email, to inform us of the error and to enable
> arrangements to be made for the destruction of the transmission, or
> its return at our cost. No liability is accepted for any
> unauthorised use of the information contained in this transmission.
> If the transmission contains advice, the advice is based on
> instructions in relation to, and is provided to the addressee in
> connection with, the matter mentioned above. Responsibility is not
> accepted for reliance upon it by any other person or for any other
> purpose.
>
> --
> R. Daniel Braun, MD FACOG(L) CMT
> Professor Emeritus
> Dept. of Obstetrics and Gynecology
> Indiana U. School of Medicine
>
> R. Daniel Braun
>
> "Science without Religion is LAME; Religion without Science is
BLIND"
> Einstein 1941
