View Full Version : oh, and also....does breech baby matter??
12-06-2007, 06:11 PM
This is a follow up to my inital "I'm New" thread. In addition to Quintin's symptoms (triangullar head, ridge on forehead, no soft spot), he was also breech until 38.5 weeks...but flipped head down @39 weeks and we induced labor to prevent him from flipping again. I have read some suggestions that a baby sitting breech cause or promote craniosynostosis. Is this true or a myth?? Also, while my 1st two son's heads measured in the 80%+, Quintin's head was only in the 25% at birth. Any relevence???
Thanks...You are all so supportive and comforting in this time of uncertainty!! If you can make it, then we can!! (IF Q is a Cranio kid....)
12-06-2007, 06:28 PM
My understanding is that there is no exact known cause of craniosynostosis, plenty of guesses and speculation, but I haven't heard of anything proven that medical professionals agree on. (unless a syndrome is involved)
It would be my guess that the % of the head is important, not on its own, but compared to other measurements of his head over time. I believe they want to see a specific amount of growth, and lack of growth is very significant. That's just my two cents. Perhaps someone else knows with more certainty.
We're with you all the way!
12-07-2007, 07:41 AM
My Fiona was breeched too, from 34 weeks until birth, I often wondered if she was metopic because of that, when they did the c-section the OB said that her head was stuck under my ribcage and it was a little tough to pull her out....I mean having her head stuck like that in such little room has to have something to do with her head shape...who knows.
12-07-2007, 08:25 AM
I'll speculate with you...I have seen an awful lot of breech babies and twins end up with cranio (especially metopic.) Zack was breech for my entire pregnancy (I had lots of u/s) and stuck under my rib-cage, requiring a c-section. I think there is definitely some merit to the "uterine constraint" theory.
Zack's head was bigger at birth, but still smaller than my other two, and unlike theirs, kept falling down to a lower curve until he had his surgery.
12-07-2007, 08:39 AM
Autumn's doc asked me the same thing when he saw her first. I guess he believe that can be a cause.
12-07-2007, 08:56 AM
my son was head down for a very long time. I went into preterm labor at 25 weeks and he was head down then. Stayed deep in my pelvis until delivery at the end of my 32nd week.
12-07-2007, 09:59 AM
Andrew was breech, although not for the entire pregnancy. It was probably for the last month. It is speculated that he turned because he couldn't "fit" in the birth canal. His head would've never "formed" like it's supposed to for delivery. At the time of birth it didn't matter to us because I was a repeat c-section. I would've hated to try and deliver him naturally. It probably would've never happened and would've ended up with a c-section anyway.
12-07-2007, 10:20 AM
kayla wasn't breech, but she was sunny side up... makes for a painful labor, and failure to progress.. c-section baby....
12-07-2007, 11:57 AM
Dillon was very low for a long time, and he came out face and shoulders facing the right (yeah, painful tear). In his case though, it's syndromatic so it's unlikely it was caused by that. I have heard of a babies positioning believed to contribute to it, but there has yet to be any significant studies to verify it, or any cause for that matter (other than syndromatic).
12-08-2007, 10:52 AM
Christina was breech till I was at 35 weeks. I don't know how exactly she was postioned after that but when I was in labor, I had to have a 4th degree episomoty so they could get her out. Maybe the bicoronal sutures were fused already??? (Who knows) The doc said that if she weighed any more then her 6'3 then I would have had a c-section. Hope that helps.
12-08-2007, 04:22 PM
Charlie was breech for the whole of my pregnancy & as we have been told that he does not have any type of syndrome they have said the most likely cause of his Metopic Synostosis was because of the breech possition alsthough this is not an official diagnosys.
I was wondering this same thing, my son was breech also. He was a c-section baby. He spent the most of the last month of pregnancy up under my ribs. Although this may not have caused the bones to fuse, I really think it had something to do with his head shape.
12-18-2007, 01:39 PM
I found a really good explination for the theory of breech babies having craniosynostosis. Here is the excerpt from Dr. Fearon's website:
Fusion of the Suture:
What causes these sutures to fuse shut? We know that a number of factors can lead to early closure of a suture. The two most common causes for premature closure of a suture are genetic and environmental. For children affected with one of the single sutural closures, we currently believe that the most common cause is environmental. We know that it is possible to cause craniosynostosis in animals by restricting the skull from growing any larger while the animal is still in the womb. It is very likely that this is the primary cause for the majority of the single sutural synostoses. The uterus, or womb, is a relatively small space. We know that sometimes babies can end up in certain positions in the uterus where they cannot move around freely. One example would be those children who end up in a breech position, and can only be delivered by c-section. We theorize that children with a single sutural synostosis somehow end up positioned in the uterus so that there is pressure on the skull. This pressure can restrict the ability of the skull bones to be stretched apart by the growing brain. If the suture is not stretched apart, it "thinks" it's job is done and it fuses shut with normal bone. Abnormal skull shapes and single sutural synostosis is seen more commonly in twins than in single births, further supporting the theory of inutero constraint. It is also more common in boys than girls leading some researchers to speculate that testosterone might make suture closure more likely if there is any restriction of skull growth inside the uterus. Mothers who have delivered babies with single sutural synostosis should not feel guilty that they did anything wrong during their pregnancy to cause this condition. Craniosynostosis occurs in spite of the mother doing everything "right."
If you want to read more.....
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.4 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.