Hi everyone,
I have never posted here. I have a question, but first I would like to thank everyone here for sharing their stories, their insight, their emotions, and everything else regarding IF, SR and pg. This board was tremendously helpful and comforting to me while I struggled with the SR decision from 3 to 2 after my IVF with 2 embryos resulted in 3. I went ahead with 3-2 SR on 7/9 and both DH and I feel very relieved. Thank you again to everyone for your honesty and frankness. You are a group of wonderful and strong women.
My question: after your SR, did your doctor recommend that your cervix be monitored by transvaginal U/S from week 16 to week 24, to monitor for the development of incompetent cervix (IC)? I went to Dr. Stone for the SR, and this is what she recommends. I thought I understood from her that the risk of IC was due to the multiples (I have twins now) and was not a result of the SR. In other words, I didn't think I am at any increased risk of developing IC from the SR, just that I am at risk for it b.c of the multiples.
Anyway, the high-risk/MFM doctors in NJ that I am supposed to see going fwd in my pregnancy never mentioned this monitoring when I saw them for the 1st trimester ultrasound/nuchal fold test (this was before we had decided to undergo SR and thought we would continue with the triplet pregnancy.) They told me of the risks of IC in general, but they did not recommend this monitoring. Now, post SR, I told them that Dr. Stone recommends this monitoring, and they said yes, they will do it, but it is because of the reduction only. In other words, if I had originally just had twins w. no SR, or if I had continued with the triplet pregnancy, they would not have recommended regular monitoring for IC. This does not make sense to me, and frankly it makes me uncomfortable that these "high risk" doctors I am seeing would not ordinarily monitor me for the "risk" of IC when I have multiples, absent a reduction. If they are the "high-risk" doctors, why not just do the ultrasounds to monitor this risk?
When I called the NJ doctors to ask this, I was put in touch with a nurse. When I asked why they would not ordinarily order this monitoring absent a reduction, I was told by the nurse that it is "not medically indicated" and it is a "very expensive test." I responded that I am insured, so "very expensive" is not a good reason, and asked what research the "not medically indicated" conclusion was based on, and she did not know.
I am now wondering what else they could be monitoring me for and are not doing so, and I am feeling uncomfortable with their lack of explanation. I would like to use them so I can deliver with my regular OB in NJ, but I am not opposed to changing doctors. I live in NJ, but I am considering switching OB's to deliver in NYC at Mt Sinai just so I can keep going to Dr. Stone's group for high risk/MFM. I just need the right info. to make a decision.
I have a follow up u/s with Dr. Stone next week and I plan to ask her about this, but I was wondering if any of you may have run into this situation and may be able to shed more light on the topic. Doesn't it seem to make logical sense that if you are carrying more than one fetus, your cervix might be strained, more so than with a singleton pg, and you may be at higher risk for IC so you should be monitored regularly? I feel like this is completely independent from undergoing SR. I am so concerned about this. Any input would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks so much.