-VISIT OUR OTHER FORUMS- OB-GYN-L Ultrasound Ultrasound History Fibroid Forum Physicians-in-Training Tech Talk OBSTET-L (portuguese) OBGIN-L (spanish) Nursing

Re: A Consult To A Colleague! From: Dave Berck (djberck@yahoo.com) Mon Aug 19 10:13:08 2002 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: Terry J. DuBose: "Re: A Consult To A Colleague!" Previous message: Allen Worrall: "Fw: Nuchal Translucency" In reply to: Ewida,Ashrafe: "A Consult To A Colleague!" Dear Dr. Ewida, Nuchal translucency can be a transient phenomenon, meaning that you could have an abnormally large NT one day and then have it be normal some time later. It is also a measurement that takes some skill and requires a specific view to get a legitimate measurement (i.e. the fetus must fill the screen, must be in the mid-sagittal plane, head not flexed or deflexed, nuchal translucency must be distinguished from the amnion, and must then be measured properly). So it is possible that the NT was indeed abnormal and then normalized, or that the measurement was done in error. Since the CVS has already been done and is presumably normal, it would be appropriate to do a fetal echocardiogram at some point later in the 2nd trimester (say 18-22 weeks) due to the association with cardiac defects as well as a good anatomic survey in the same time frame. -- Dave Berck, MD, MPH, RDMS --- "Ewida,Ashrafe" <Ashrafe.S.Ewida@drexel.edu> wrote: > I am a faculty member in Anesthesia Department in > Drexel University Coll. of Medicine, Philadelphia, > PA. > > Few Days ago, my wife and I were told that our first > baby has nuchal translucency diameter 4.0-4.5 mm. > Four days later she had vaginal bleeding where she > underwent emergency ultrasound. The baby is Ok and > nuchal translucency was 2.3-2.4 mm. Do you think > that the first reading was fault? What are the > landmarks in the ultrasound exam to be looked at to > get the correct measurement? Is it the experience > of any consultants, in maternal fetal > medicine/ultrasound medicine/OBGYN, to see nuchal > translucency drop to its half diameter in four days? > > After the first scan, a CVS was obtained and FISH > result came back normal. The final karyotyping is > pending. What is the chance that after normal > karyotyping the baby is OK? Especially with this > discrepancy in the diameter of nuchal translucency, > ~4.0 mm to 2.3 mm in four days, Is it more likely > that the nuchal translucency diameter was and is > normal? Is it more likely that the first scan was a > fault? > > If anyone can have any input, please e-mail me your > comment quickly. Thanks. > > Sincerely, > > Ashrafe Ewida, M.D., M.Sc. > Instructor Of Anesthesia > Cardiothoracic and Transplant Anesthesiologist > Drexel University > MCP-Hahnamann Medical School > Mail Stop 310 > 245 N. 15th Street > Philadelphia, PA 19102 > T.(215)762-7795 > F.(215)762-8656 > ===== David J. Berck, MD, MPH HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com Next message: Terry J. DuBose: "Re: A Consult To A Colleague!" Previous message: Allen Worrall: "Fw: Nuchal Translucency" In reply to: Ewida,Ashrafe: "A Consult To A Colleague!"

recommended search...
OBGYN.net forums endometriosis zone Web

Return to

Mail a New Message to the Forum: ultrasound@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: terry.dubose@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Thu Oct 2 05:18:50 2008

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.