Low beta IVF (130 @ 14dp5dt)

[Anonymous]

My first beta at 9dp5dt was 43 - however, I’d been on nightly HCG boosters for over a week. They had me stop the HCG boosters that day
Second beta at 11dp5dt (after 2 nights without boosters) was 50
Was pretty positive I was out, but then my third beta today at 14dp5dt came back at 132

What could be going on - is there any hope? 132 at 14dp5dt is a remarkably low number, am I wrong about that?
(Please be honest/realistic, I want to avoid having the false hope that I feel creeping in if it’s unlikely that this is viable)

[Anonymous]

That does not seem super optimistic, OP. As you well know, it's not so much about the numbers as the predictable doubling over time. I have not done all the math, but sadly it doesn't seem to be going up fast enough in your case. I am very sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That does not seem super optimistic, OP. As you well know, it's not so much about the numbers as the predictable doubling over time. I have not done all the math, but sadly it doesn't seem to be going up fast enough in your case. I am very sorry.

Thank you - yeah, I know I shouldn’t be particularly optimistic but hate that I feel some hope too. So your concern is less about how low that # is for how far out from transfer I am, and more that it didn’t double (…or even close) between the first two betas?

[Anonymous]

NP here. It's both. Those are just not viable beta numbers, I'm sorry. The "what-if" game is torture, but it's best to be realistic and not let yourself have false hope. Better luck next time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That does not seem super optimistic, OP. As you well know, it's not so much about the numbers as the predictable doubling over time. I have not done all the math, but sadly it doesn't seem to be going up fast enough in your case. I am very sorry.

Thank you - yeah, I know I shouldn’t be particularly optimistic but hate that I feel some hope too. So your concern is less about how low that # is for how far out from transfer I am, and more that it didn’t double (…or even close) between the first two betas?

Yes.

I had a very low beta pregnancy (my beta was 8 at 10dpt. 8!!!) but the numbers kept doubling right on track and that "prepare for a miscarriage" baby just turned 10. But my doctors were very clear that the numbers had to consistently double. A slow rise is not good, no matter where the numbers start.

[Anonymous]

So sorry you're getting these numbers OP. I had really bad betas as well that resulted in ectopic. My numbers played out this way:

Found out pregnant naturally, got in next day - 60
2 days later - 92
2 days later - 132, doctor calls to say not viable, could be ectopic but they don't know because numbers are so low
One week later - 136
Four days later - 72 - finally seeing numbers go down, think miscarrying

Next day ectopic rupture. Baby was 5 weeks 4 days in pathology. Just wanted to prepare you as I didn't find much info on this when going through it and it was a very bad experience. I wasn't on HCG boosters so hopefully you will not have to go through ectopic or if you are they are able to diagnose and provide methotrexate before a rupture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That does not seem super optimistic, OP. As you well know, it's not so much about the numbers as the predictable doubling over time. I have not done all the math, but sadly it doesn't seem to be going up fast enough in your case. I am very sorry.

Thank you - yeah, I know I shouldn’t be particularly optimistic but hate that I feel some hope too. So your concern is less about how low that # is for how far out from transfer I am, and more that it didn’t double (…or even close) between the first two betas?

Yes.

I had a very low beta pregnancy (my beta was 8 at 10dpt. 8!!!) but the numbers kept doubling right on track and that "prepare for a miscarriage" baby just turned 10. But my doctors were very clear that the numbers had to consistently double. A slow rise is not good, no matter where the numbers start.

That's great but there is no recorded pregnancy where where the beta reading didn't increase by 75% in the span of two days. Sadly, OP's numbers are not there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here. It's both. Those are just not viable beta numbers, I'm sorry. The "what-if" game is torture, but it's best to be realistic and not let yourself have false hope. Better luck next time.

If you were me would you just stop meds now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. It's both. Those are just not viable beta numbers, I'm sorry. The "what-if" game is torture, but it's best to be realistic and not let yourself have false hope. Better luck next time.

If you were me would you just stop meds now?

No, if I were you I would be asking my doctor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That does not seem super optimistic, OP. As you well know, it's not so much about the numbers as the predictable doubling over time. I have not done all the math, but sadly it doesn't seem to be going up fast enough in your case. I am very sorry.

Thank you - yeah, I know I shouldn’t be particularly optimistic but hate that I feel some hope too. So your concern is less about how low that # is for how far out from transfer I am, and more that it didn’t double (…or even close) between the first two betas?

Yes.

I had a very low beta pregnancy (my beta was 8 at 10dpt. 8!!!) but the numbers kept doubling right on track and that "prepare for a miscarriage" baby just turned 10. But my doctors were very clear that the numbers had to consistently double. A slow rise is not good, no matter where the numbers start.

That's great but there is no recorded pregnancy where where the beta reading didn't increase by 75% in the span of two days. Sadly, OP's numbers are not there.

OP here - fwiw if you’re talking about the first two betas, the nurse’s opinion is that my first beta may indeed have been 25 or so, but was (obviously) affected by being on daily HCG boosters. Which I guess could make sense, but then I’m still worried about how low everything seems

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. It's both. Those are just not viable beta numbers, I'm sorry. The "what-if" game is torture, but it's best to be realistic and not let yourself have false hope. Better luck next time.

If you were me would you just stop meds now?

No, if I were you I would be asking my doctor.

Well yes, I obviously did that haha

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So sorry you're getting these numbers OP. I had really bad betas as well that resulted in ectopic. My numbers played out this way:

Found out pregnant naturally, got in next day - 60
2 days later - 92
2 days later - 132, doctor calls to say not viable, could be ectopic but they don't know because numbers are so low
One week later - 136
Four days later - 72 - finally seeing numbers go down, think miscarrying

Next day ectopic rupture. Baby was 5 weeks 4 days in pathology. Just wanted to prepare you as I didn't find much info on this when going through it and it was a very bad experience. I wasn't on HCG boosters so hopefully you will not have to go through ectopic or if you are they are able to diagnose and provide methotrexate before a rupture.

Thank you for this - looking back, did you have any symptoms that would indicate that’s what was going on?

[Anonymous]

So sorry op. My first pregnancy was like this. Just a sac at 6 weeks, but didn’t naturally miscarry until 10 weeks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So sorry you're getting these numbers OP. I had really bad betas as well that resulted in ectopic. My numbers played out this way:

Found out pregnant naturally, got in next day - 60
2 days later - 92
2 days later - 132, doctor calls to say not viable, could be ectopic but they don't know because numbers are so low
One week later - 136
Four days later - 72 - finally seeing numbers go down, think miscarrying

Next day ectopic rupture. Baby was 5 weeks 4 days in pathology. Just wanted to prepare you as I didn't find much info on this when going through it and it was a very bad experience. I wasn't on HCG boosters so hopefully you will not have to go through ectopic or if you are they are able to diagnose and provide methotrexate before a rupture.

Thank you for this - looking back, did you have any symptoms that would indicate that’s what was going on?

No, just had the knowledge from RE that it could be ectopic, which was very helpful. The rupture wasn't that painful for me and I identified because of how long the pain was and that it wasn't gas, etc. I didn't have internal bleeding or other symptoms and it was incredibly difficult to explain to ER that it was ectopic because on day of rupture the HCG had dropped to 47 or something like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So sorry op. My first pregnancy was like this. Just a sac at 6 weeks, but didn’t naturally miscarry until 10 weeks.

Ugh I’m sorry to hear that, that must have felt like an eternal wait. Thank you