We are from Australia and where wondering if you can please shed some more light on our ultrasound report...we have several appointments with specialists in the coming weeks...but would like another opinon in regards to exactly what it all means? chances of it being down syndrome or similar? chances of death or miscarrage? chances of baby being healthy etc etc? possible treatments? Do we start worrying?

REPORT AS FOLLOWS

Findings: The patient reports current gestation of 20 weeks 3 days, with EDD of 30.06.2008.

A single active fetus was demonstrated. The placenta is sited at the fundus, and appears homogeneous in echotexture, without evidence of haemorrhage. The inferior placental margin is well clear of the os. The amniotic fluid volume is appropriate for gestatiom.
Current biometric detail is as follows:

BPD 51mm (21+5 weeks)
HC 187mm (22 weeks)
AC 176mm (22 weeks)
FL 33.6mm (20 + 6 weeks)

These are in keeping with the known gestation according to previous ultrasound, to suggest appropriate interval growth.

Two studies were required for complete morphological review. Whilst there was no marked ventriculomegaly, with the ventricles measuring up to 9.9mm, there was a “dangling” configuration of the choroid plexus within the left lateral ventricle. Cranial appearances were otherwise unremarkable, with normal cranial contour and cerebellar/posterior fossa morphology unremarkable. Similarly, normal spinal detail was demonstrated.

In addition, whilst there was no definite hydronephrosis, there was prominence of the renal pelves bilaterally, with associated infundibular prominence. Maximal AP pelvic dimensions of 5.9mm and 4.3mm were demonstrated. The bladder remained distended throughout the course of both studies. Remaining morphological detail was unremarkable, with regular fetal heart trace confirmed.

No previous imaging or results of the first trimester screening study are available for review. There is prominence of the renal pelves bilaterally, with associated infundibular prominence noted. As a solitary finding, this requires repeat imaging for further assessment at 28 weeks gestation. However, in addition to the altered choroid morphology as a further soft marker, raises the question of an underlying chromosomal anomaly. No associated ventriculomegaly, posterior fossa or spinal abnormality is demonstrated.