Re: Acute chorionamnionitis
From: Marisa (anonymous@obgyn.net)
Sun, 30 Jul 2000 05:57:12 -0500 (CDT)
Sadly, I too lost my first baby with the diagnosis of chorioamniotis at
22 weeks. The specialist found that staph aureus was the infection
present. However, I doubt that this was the causal factor as is it a
common bacteria and almost impossible to avoid contact.
I have seen 3 specialists and none have been able to give me conclusive
evidence to indicate why this happened. So..
I think I have come to accept that it was an unfortunate act of nature
and hopefully it won't happen again. I know that I am now considered
high risk in a next pregnancy.
I too am sorry for your loss.
Kind regards,
Marisa
At Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Kelly Shanahan, MD wrote:
>
>At Fri, 28 Jul 2000, Michelle wrote:
>>
>>I was having contractions and bleeding since my 3rd month of pregnancy.
>>I had premature delivery at 22 weeks.
>
>I'm so sorry for your loss
>
> A test on my placenta reveals
>>acute chorionamnionitis.
>
>recent infection of hte fetal membranes
>
> Please explain in layman's terms the pathology
>>report and what caused this and what I can do to prevent this from
>>recurring in my future pregnancies..
>>"..discoid placenta..weighing 350 gms..eccentrically located umbilical
>>cord..
>
>placenta shaped like a saucer -- normal. 350 gms is higher than average
>placental wieght at this point -- it's usually this size closer to 30
>weeks. Cord is inserted into the placenta a bit off center, not a big
>deal.
>
>fetal surface is blue gray with easily stripped off membrane and
>>anastomosing blood vessels. the maternal surface is red brown and
>>complete. serial sections show no infarcts..blood clots..
>
>all normal
>
>show varizised
>>chorionic villi some of which are vascular while others are lined by a
>>single layer of trophoblasts. the chorion and amnion are infiltrated by
>>acute inflammatory cells.
>
>There is infection, with lots of white cells present in the two layers
>of the membranes
>
> the umbilical cord is unremarkable.
>
>The whole picture points to infection -- if your membranes were
>ruptured, this could account for these findings, even if you did not
>have an infection before you went into labor. In fact, tha lack of
>"chronic inflammation" in hte report suggests you did not have a
>longstanding infection
>>
>>Thank you
>
>--
>M. Kelly Shanahan, MD, FACOG
>S. LAke Tahoe, CA
>
>This post is for educational purposes only and does not construe a doctor-patient relationship. It does not take the place of a consultation with your own doctor.
>
>***private e-mails will NOT be answered -- or even read. Please do NOT send a private e-mail as it interferes with the very limited time I have with my own family!!***
>
![[ Pregnancy & Birth Forum ]](/pregnancy-birth/pnb_forum_L.gif)