Velamentous Cord Insertion

(16 posts)(3 voices)
  1. Hi - I posted this initially on the multiples board but thought i might get more responses here.

    At my 20 week growth scan the doctor noticed that Baby A had a velamentous cord insertion and while the baby had the appropriate measurements for 20 weeks, there could be issues down the road due to not getting enough nutrients from the placenta (bec the cord is not positioned properly). When i went for my 22 week doctor visit (which was just a quick sonogram to check cervical length and heartbeats), the doctor noted that Baby A is visibly smaller than Baby B.

    i'm hoping that Baby A is just smaller relative to Baby B but still within normal growth range but i wont know until they do the 24 week growth scan. Anyone else have any experience with this type of issue?

  2. bump......anyone with any experience with this or any other type of IUGR?

  3. Where is your placenta? Has your dr said if it is low lying? Have you had any previous uterine surgeries like D&C?

    Reason I'm asking is because of a condition called vasa previa. I was pg with twins and baby A had vasa previa - it is a life threatening condition. Both of my babies had VCI and it can be dangerous since the vessels are not encased in the cord - spider web over the placenta.

  4. luckily i dont have vasa previa. i had placenta previa but the placenta moved...and when it did, thats when the cord ended up in the wrong place...

  5. Where is the cord? The cord position near or over the cervial os is vasa previa. How the cord is inserted into the placenta is a different thing alltogether and is the velementous cord insertion.

    VCI can be dangerous as those spidered vessels are not supported inside the cord casing so they are vulnerable to rupture if there is any pressure put on them like when the baby descends into the birth canal.

    I guess I'm just confused about your diagnosis and want to help if I can.

  6. No experience w/ VCI, but I did have experience w/ IUGR due to compromised blood flow to/from the placenta. It was noticed as a possible problem at 20 weeks and confirmed to be an issue at 24 weeks. I was monitored very closely to (frequent u/s and biophysical profiles). At the point where they felt the baby would do better outside than inside (he failed his BPP and non-stress test was non-reactive), they delivered me via c-section. This was at 30 weeks 5 days. DS spent 6 1/2 weeks in the NICU but did quite well there and is now happy and healthy and will turn one next week. Several medical professionals mentioned to me that IUGR babies tend to do really well in the NICU and afterwards- babies under "stress" in the womb tend to develop faster for whatever reason. Lots of luck to you!

    Marie

  7. i have VCI for one of the babies, not vasa previa and not placenta previa. The other baby is fine. sorry if my posts werent clear but apparently i originally had placenta previa for Baby A but the placenta moved and thats what caused the VCI.

  8. One other thing, given the risks of a vaginal delivery with a VCI baby, we are almost certainly going with a scheduled c-section. We were seriously considering it before the diagnosis due to the fact that i'm having twins and no interest in having both a vaginal and c-section delivery (in case baby b needs to be delivered via emergency c-section). however, with the VCI diagnosis and from what i'm heard about the dangers of a vaginal delivery, we are going to go with a c-section.

  9. Okay, I know I now sound like a complete pain in the you know what but I just can't help myself on this subject. I, of course, am not a doctor but I have a lot of experience with this area and belong to an online group of parents who have lost children needlessly because VP & VCI were not detected and treated appropriately.

    The placenta previa moving did not cause the VCI. The VCI starts to happen when the placenta is being formed after conception. Please google it. The location of the placenta in the uterus has no bearing whatsoever on the VCI - they are independent of each other. A VCI on a placenta that is high up in the uterus is likely to cause less trouble because gravity keeps the baby down south. A low lying placenta (not necessarily placenta previa) with a VCI is very serious as any pressure from the baby can rupture one of the unsupported vessels that are just hanging out there. Vasa previa just adds another huge element because the unsupported vessels cross the cervix. If the cord is NOT cross that area you are ok with regard to VP.

    Please go to youtube and check out my video of the VCI my twins had. We only knew that one twin had it along with VP but the other twin also had VCI and we didn't know it or at least I wasn't told about it.

    youtube.com

  10. thanks for the additional information. Bottom line is that Baby A has VCI but not (at least at this time) vasa previa. Baby B seems to be ok. So far the VCI has not affected Baby A's growth and both babies are measuring within a couple ounces of each other and both within the 30-35% range which is considered normal. i go for growth scans every two weeks and the doctors seem to be on top the situation.

    With VCI, does that mean that a vaginal birth is probably out of the question?

  11. It just depends on where the cord is. With twins though there's not a lot of room in there. The thing is that these vessels can't handle compression like they could if they were in the cord. Even sometimes the cord itself can't handle compression and that can be seen on the monitors - they can tell if the babies heartrates start to slow down. I think that term is decels, not sure.

    Babies have very low blood volume and can bleed out in less than 2 minutes. If one of those vessels did rupture during labor you wouldn't know it until it started showing up on the monitor and by then it is too late to get a c-section. Blood transfusions can't be done fast enough.

    They can do c/s really fast but not in less than 2 minutes. I was on hospital bedrest for 4 weeks in the labor & delivery dept close to the OR and was told that being that close was no guarantee that I would have a happy outcome. That was with VP and VCI though.

    Lots of moms deliver twins vaginally and go home within 24 hours. I was going to have a c/s anyway because my older DS was born via c/s. Once we were told about the VP & VCI we were glad we already had wrapped our brains around having a c/s. Some women really long for that experience and feel cheated if they don't have a vaginal delivery. After 18 hours of labor with my DS I just wanted him out no matter how they had to do it!!!!!!

  12. Thanks for the info. i dont really care how i deliver but would prefer a vaginal birth if only for the easier recovery. We are leaning towards just doing a scheduled c-section so as to alleviate any issues.

  13. Just checking in to see how you are doing. Any new news?

  14. thanks for checking in...so far so good. both babies weighed aboug 2lbs at my 26 week growth scan...i'm going back tomorrow for another scan and hope to have similar results. will keep you posted. THanks!

  15. How was the latest u/s?

  16. they're both still growing strong. one was 2lb 9oz and the other was 2lb 10oz! they are getting really big. the doc told me that he doesnt have any problem delivering them vaginally as long as Baby A is heads down. he said not to worry about the cord and that its only a problem when its vasa previa...i'm still concerned though but have plenty of time to decide what i'm going to do.

    thanks for checking in on me!

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.