Posted by: Tholly zee | 2005/05/24

Safer option

Hi Doc

I am seven months pregnant and HIV positive. I am also on treatment. My CD4 is at 450,and there is no trace of Viral load. Some doctors say I must go for ceaser and others say natural birth is the safest. I am now confused. which one would you recommend between the two and why?

Not what you were looking for? Try searching again, or ask your own question
Our expert says:
Expert ImageGynaeDoc

It depends on what treatment you are receiving. If it is just AZT, a caesarean section would decrease the risk of transmission to the baby even more. If you are receiving HAART, a caesarean may not make any difference. There would be a slightly increased chance of infection in you with a caesarean.

Best wishes

The information provided does not constitute a diagnosis of your condition. You should consult a medical practitioner or other appropriate health care professional for a physical exmanication, diagnosis and formal advice. Health24 and the expert accept no responsibility or liability for any damage or personal harm you may suffer resulting from making use of this content.

Our users say:
Posted by: Tolly zee | 2005/05/31

Hi doc
I posted a question on the 24th May and asked if natural or caesar is the best option if on HIV treatment. I am taking the COMBIVIRA and VIRAMUNE. On your reply you were talking fo HAART. I am I safe on Natural delivery?

Reply to Tolly zee
Posted by: samantha | 2005/05/24

The caesar will be better. Little one will be exposed to less blood, as far as I know. I am curious to see what Science and the gynaedoc have to say.
Good luck!

Reply to samantha

Have your say

Thanks for commenting! Your comment will appear on the site shortly.
Thanks for commenting! Your comment will appear on the site shortly.