02 July 2010
33–year–old’s pregnancy mistaken for stomach infection
A33–year–old woman who underwent tubectomy in 2002, has stumped the medical fraternity by conceiving again. Doctors were initially treating Yogita Waghela for a stomach infection leading to a swollen tummy, but later at Cama and Albless Hospital they stumbled upon the foetus growing inside her fallopian tube.
Waghela who was suffering from acute abdominal pain, consulted a general practitioner who allegedly treated her for stomach infection. She was also admitted at a local hospital for a few days, where she underwent a sonography twice but the doctors were unable to detect her pregnancy. It was only when she reached to Cama and Albless that doctors discovered her pregnancy.
"Waghela was brought to the hospital in a very critical condition. She was bleeding from her vagina, and her blood pressure was low," said Dr Rajshree Katke, associate professor of Obstetric and Gynaecology at the hospital. "We immediately shifted her to the ICU for an operation."
Dr Katke added that because of the late diagnosis, Waghela’s fallopian tubes had ruptured and she had already developed septicaemia. "We removed the 12–week foetus from her tube. She is out of danger now," she clarified, adding, "This is one of the rarest cases I have seen in my 20–yearcareer."
"Pregnancy after eight years of tubectomy is extremely rare. Nobody diagnosed her pregnancy because nobody thought that she could conceive. Her sonography report shows that there is a mass in her tube but no one thought that could be a foetus," said Dr Katke.
Waghela who is still in a shock, said, "I was getting my periods and was under the impression that the stomach ache was because of some infection. I had been popping pain killers for one whole month! I am thankful to the doctors who saved my life."
Yogita married Ramesh Waghila in 1999 and after bearing two children she went for a tubectomy in 2002. Her daughter is 10 years old while the son is seven years of age.
Disclaimer: The news story on this page is the copyright of the cited publication. This has been reproduced here for visitors to review, comment on and discuss. This is in keeping with the principle of ‘Fair dealing’ or ‘Fair use’. Visitors may click on the publication name, in the news story, to visit the original article as it appears on the publication’s website.
