CT scan for pelvic disproportion?

[fludo]

I posted this in the pregnancy test section a few days ago with no response (not sure it was the right section) so I'll try again here.....

Anyone had this scan done? I hear they're not that accurate but thought I'd get it done anyway until my ob told me it was a CT scan. Does anyone know of the risks in pregnancy? I'd be 36 weeks at the time.

Also, has anyone had this test done? I read something about injecting a dye in you ...is this correct? All sounds a bit icky!

[NonnyMouse]

I have no ecperience with it, but would avoid it like the plague unless I had a physical deformity or pelvic injury that put me at very high risk of there being a baby/pelvis size problem.

They can't gauge it at all by scan... as the scan fails to take into account the moulding baby's head does in the birth canal, and the widening the pelvis does during labour.

[punky]

Hi,
I am a CT/MRI radiographer. I have done several of these scans, they are not very common. They are relatively low risk/low radiation. But as the previous poster said they cannot be 100% on the measurements.

There is no injection of CT contrast(dye), you would simply lie down and go in and out of the machine several times.

The most risky time for radiation exposure is during the first 12 weeks as that is when the foetus is rapidly developing. At 36 weeks the risk is much lower but there is still risk.

Personally if it were me I would not be having the scan and I always make sure patients know the risks before having these scans.

Hope I've been some help.

[Lillynix]

The scans are a crock. Steer clear, completely!

There is NO point in taking measurements and trying to guess the size of a pelvis when the woman is not in labour.

Being in labour does a LOT to a pelvis, it shifts, moves, makes room to accommodate a baby, practically 'falls apart' and add in to that the fact that the baby's head is also made to mold to fit through the pelvis, means that these scans cannot be accurate at all and are a waste of time.

Unless you have true CPD (cephalopelvic disproportion) casues by a birth defect, severe trauma or a case of rickets (which trust me, you don't have) then there is absolutely no reason to assume you have a weird pelvis that wouldn't accommodate a baby.

Trust in your body, it knows what it is doing :hugs:

[fludo]

Thanks for the replies, particularly punky for your first-hand knowledge. I'm actually already booked in for an elective c/s (for various reasons) and am most likely going with this option, but thought "why not" get the scan done anyway just in case I go into labour early, to help me decide whether to give it a go or not.

But you've all helped me decide that no, I don't want to take the risk for what could be no benefit at all or even false information. My ob thought that as DD didn't fit at all last time (didn't descend at all) and she was only small (just on 7 pounds) that I could have a shallow pelvis. BUT, she was posterior AND had her head deflexed, so yeah, that would have made her comparatively HEAPS bigger! I generally like my ob and trust her judgement but I don't understand why she, along with so many other obs, seem to discount fetus position as a MAJOR factor in baby not fitting, and instead say, oh your pelvis must be faulty!