21 weeker going home!!! - page 2

all i can say is, we'd better open more nicu's if this is where we're going. www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=437236&in_page_id=1774 - feb 19, 2007... Read More

  1. by   SteveNNP
    Quote from dawngloves
    You know Kate, I think you're right! :uhoh21:
    Wow, I never picked up on that..... it makes it a bit more believable...
  2. by   dawngloves
    I was just chatting with some IVF moms and the EDD is when the egg is fertilized, not implanted! So you have to add two weeks. This baby was nearly 24 weeks. And no doubt IUGR.
  3. by   Jokerhill
    I just figured that out, laying in bed, about the Blastocyst growing prior to implantation, and thought I would be first on here with it but I'm a bit slow it seems. But it has been bothering me all day thinking of how many deliveries we don't go on and just have L&d give comfort care to if the dates are good. So like Dawngloves says 24 weeks and IUGR, and a bunch of HYPE.
  4. by   bethin
    I have absolutely no clue what you all are saying. I'm going to have to do some research to determing what all these 21 + PCM or whatever means.

    Are you all saying it's a hoax or something?
  5. by   Gompers
    Quote from bethin
    I have absolutely no clue what you all are saying. I'm going to have to do some research to determing what all these 21 + PCM or whatever means.

    Are you all saying it's a hoax or something?

    Not a hoax, but this baby most likely was 23-6/7 instead of 21-6/7 weeks. Reason? You start counting from the first day of your last menstral period before getting pregnant. Most women ovulate around day 14 of their cycle. I still don't understand WHY they start counting when they do, but it's the universal way of counting gestational days. So if you find out you're pregnant 5 weeks after the start of your last period, you'll be told that you're 5 weeks along even though you only conceived 3 weeks beforehand.

    I hear this kind of thing a lot in the NICU because so many of the babies are IVF. The family will keep saying that the baby is 22 or 23 weeks, and when we say it's really 24-25 they tell us that it was IVF so they know for sure of their dates. Then we have to explain the 2-week thing. Gets even more confusing when we talk about the date of the last menstral period because many of the women who need IVF don't have normal periods, so you can't go by that.

    I hope I'm making sense.

    Basically, the mom probably didn't have a normal menstral period to count from, so they were using the IVF dates instead. They should've added 2 weeks to that, but obviously didn't. What confuses me is why the DOCTORS are talking to the press, if this really is a case of a 23-6/7 weeker surviving instead of a 21-6/7 weeker. Maybe it really IS true???

    Or else they just want publicity.
  6. by   BittyBabyGrower
    OMG....you're right! I forgot about the 2 week rule! There is really NO way a 21 weeker can survive! It makes much more sense that the kid is 23-24 weeks!

    Neonatologists love publicity....so why wouldn't I doubt they want to toot their own horn
  7. by   RainDreamer
    283 grams?! Oh my goodness!! The smallest baby I've ever seen was a 22-weeker we had that was ~390. The smallest I ever took care of myself was a 24 week admit that I got that was ~540 and I thought she was so incredibly tiny. And this one was over 200 grams smaller?!?? I can't even imagine taking care of something that small. How do they put lines in? How do you even do anything with something so small? Wow.
  8. by   bethin
    Quote from Gompers
    Not a hoax, but this baby most likely was 23-6/7 instead of 21-6/7 weeks. Reason? You start counting from the first day of your last menstral period before getting pregnant. Most women ovulate around day 14 of their cycle. I still don't understand WHY they start counting when they do, but it's the universal way of counting gestational days. So if you find out you're pregnant 5 weeks after the start of your last period, you'll be told that you're 5 weeks along even though you only conceived 3 weeks beforehand.

    I hear this kind of thing a lot in the NICU because so many of the babies are IVF. The family will keep saying that the baby is 22 or 23 weeks, and when we say it's really 24-25 they tell us that it was IVF so they know for sure of their dates. Then we have to explain the 2-week thing. Gets even more confusing when we talk about the date of the last menstral period because many of the women who need IVF don't have normal periods, so you can't go by that.

    I hope I'm making sense.

    Basically, the mom probably didn't have a normal menstral period to count from, so they were using the IVF dates instead. They should've added 2 weeks to that, but obviously didn't. What confuses me is why the DOCTORS are talking to the press, if this really is a case of a 23-6/7 weeker surviving instead of a 21-6/7 weeker. Maybe it really IS true???

    Or else they just want publicity.
    Thank you Gompers! That makes sense. Although counting the first day of your last period does not make sense. If you ovulate around day 14, then the baby would be approx two weeks younger. But I guess in this case that's a moot point d/t IVF.

    I'm not trying to have a baby (no potential donors ) but I have never kept track of my periods. I'm a dr's nightmare.

    What's teh -6/7 mean? Sorry if I'm asking too many questions. Curiousity killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.

    Oh, and I hope your little one is doing great!
  9. by   gamecockfan
    oops!
    Last edit by gamecockfan on Feb 21, '07 : Reason: duplicate
  10. by   gamecockfan
    This little on has to be severe IUGR possibly 23 weeks. The big question I have is-what about her head? What I would give to have 15 minutes alone with her medical record. Too many unanswered questions for our nicu brains!!
  11. by   RainDreamer
    To answer bethin's question, 21 6/7 weeks means she's 21 weeks and 6 days, so pretty much 22 weeks.

    An article I read said they thought she was at least 23 weeks, but her fertility specialist pinpointed the exact date of fertilization. So I wonder if they went 22 weeks from that date, or if they went ahead and added the 2 weeks. Like the previous posted said, she had to have been severely IUGR to be a 24 weeker.

    It seems like such a huge mistake, but then again would they do anything for the publicity? What I would give to have 15 minutes alone with her doctor to get all these questions answered!

    At least the neos that were quoted in the articles pointed out that this was very RARE and NOT the norm for these babies.
    Last edit by RainDreamer on Feb 22, '07
  12. by   Mimi2RN
    It makes much more sense to think of her as a twenty three weeker, IUGR. I can understand the way the docs are counting, but hope we don't have to explain that too many times. I noticed in the pics how bruised she was. Hope she is one of the few, with a brain, lungs and gut. And no CP.
  13. by   preemieRNkate
    The article that Prmenrs posted says that the baby has had some respiratory problems (well, duh), a very mild brain hemorrhage and some digestive problems. I wish they would tell us more!!

close