Hi, I'm confused and am having trouble researching on Dr. Google, maybe you knowledgeable MoMs can help clear this up for me. I will do my best to explain my question, sorry if it comes out as jumbled as I am right now.
I was led to believe that having cervical length meant that you are not dilated. Meaning that cervical length reaches 0, then you start to dilate.
But now I've been told that is wrong, that you can start to dilate even when you still have cervical length. Is that true? How is that possible?
Is this referring to dilation of one side, like on the side of the uterus which is known as funneling?
Or is it actually saying that you can truly dilate, symmetrically, while you still retain cervical length?
I was reassured that my bedrest and meds were working (even though I still have contractions every hour, just fewer) since my cervix is still long and closed despite the fact that it is now very soft instead of firm. So should I not take cervical length to be as reassuring if it can still dilate?
Thanks and I hope that makes a bit of sense!
Re: Confused- cervical length vs. dilation
USUALLY as your cervix shortens in length it starts to open. You sometimes hear the terms effaced and dilated. I have heard of funneling though.
https://www.mayoclinic.com/health/medical/IM03897
https://www.webmd.com/baby/tc/cervical-effacement-and-dilatation-
Me: 32 - Stage II Endo / DH: 36 - Low count and morphology (1%)
IUIs 1-3 BFN, lap Dec. 2010, IUIs 4-6 BFN
IVF w/ICSI #1 - ER 2/8: 24R 19M 9F ET 2/13 2-5 day blasts (no frosties) = BFP - b/g twins!
E & C Born 10/19/2012
Twin boys born too early at 17w4d and 18w2d in February 2010
Transabdominal cerclage placed September 2010
DS born at 35w1d in February 2011
Twin girls born at exactly 36w in February 2013