| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 981.1 | | LJSRV1::BOURQUARD | Deb | Tue Jul 11 1995 10:15 | 8 |
| try "ectopic pregnancy"
Instead of growing in the uterus, the fertilized egg lodges in the
Fallopian tubes and grows there. I understand it's life-threatening,
tremendously painful, and can cause infertility. Sorry to hear
of this...
- Deb B.
|
| 981.2 | ectopic pregnancy | FOUNDR::PLOURDE | | Tue Jul 11 1995 10:15 | 7 |
| I believe the other term is ectopic, which means the pregnancy was not
in the uterus (where it should be), but instead in the falopian tube.
I know I've seen other notes in here on it, but can't recall right
now where. I'll look around.
julie
|
| 981.3 | | FOUNDR::PLOURDE | | Tue Jul 11 1995 10:16 | 3 |
| sorry, must have written .2 at the same time as .1 !
j
|
| 981.4 | ectopic pregnancies | UHUH::BNELSON | | Tue Jul 11 1995 10:39 | 4 |
| They're also called ectopic pregnancies. The embryo implants in the
fallopian tube instead of travelling down to the uterus to implant
there. It is dangerous because the tube isn't big enough for a
growing baby; the mother can bleed as a result.
|
| 981.5 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Tue Jul 11 1995 10:41 | 1 |
| The term is tubal, not tubular.
|
| 981.6 | | ALFAXP::MITCHAM | The Watkins Man | Tue Jul 11 1995 13:44 | 6 |
| Thanks, all. I appreciate the information.
-Andy
ps. Thanks to whomever changed the topic title to correctly reflect
this diagnosis.
|
| 981.7 | | SAPPHO::DUBOIS | Bear takes over WDW in Pooh D'Etat! | Tue Jul 11 1995 15:02 | 9 |
| Also, I believe that the reason it can cause infertility is the damage
done to the fallopian tube. Since it only damages the one tube, though,
then there is still a chance to get pregnant on the months when the other
side ovulates, assuming that side has no damage from something else.
My coworker, too. It looks like she'll be coming home from the hospital
within an hour, though.
Carol
|
| 981.8 | ectopic pregnancy | DSSDEV::MATTIE | | Tue Jul 11 1995 15:37 | 12 |
| I had an tubal/ectopic pregnancy in March of 1994. Something just told
me that the pregnancy wasn't normal.....no morning sickness, tiredness,
or anything. Finally I got past the nurse practioners, and physician's
assistants (you know how those HMO's can be!) and got to see a doctor.
He trusted my instinct that something was wrong. After some testing,
I went in for emergency surgery. I had no pain or cramps at all to
give them any clues. I stayed overnight and went home the next day.
The surgery was laproscopic so the incisions were minimal.
I'm sorry for what your friend is going through.
Janet
|
| 981.9 | | ALFAXP::MITCHAM | The Watkins Man | Tue Jul 11 1995 15:44 | 7 |
| > I stayed overnight and went home the next day.
> The surgery was laproscopic so the incisions were minimal.
Yes, this sounds very similar to what I am led to believe was performed
on her as well (three small incisions).
-Andy
|
| 981.10 | IUD's | MAIL1::LOCOVARE | | Thu Jul 20 1995 10:59 | 5 |
|
This is a side effect too I have heard for women who use
IUD's. A co-worker of mine 6 years ago used one and had
3 tubal preganancies occur.. after the 3rd she gave it up..
|