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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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?
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.