Does size matter?

Also: Forgot to mention that when I had my day-whatever baseline US Monday, I got a copy of my MRI report, mostly just for my own information. (Know what else I'm doing? Checking up on what my RE has been telling me, because I don't quite trust him. Know what else I'm doing? Slowly accumulating copies of everything in my file, under the radar, so they don't notice, so that if/when I decide to switch doctors I will be able to do it on a moment's notice, without going through the clusterfuck of getting them to copy my file for me. Tuesday I'm going to get all my diagnostic bloodwork. Fun!)

Anyway, I've been reading the Yahoo mullerian anomalies support group, and some people have mentioned that their doctor said their uterus was "UU but normal size" or "a bit smaller than normal," and that seems to be a good thing (as opposed to half the normal size as one would think UU would be).* So I wondered, do I have a near-normal size uterus? And why bother asking my doctor, when he didn't bother to mention it in the first place!

So I checked the MRI report. It says that my uterus measures "approximately 7.5 cm in length, 5.8 cm in transverse and 3.9 cm AP." Dr. Google tells me that a "normal" uterus is about 8 cm x 6 cm x 4 cm. So I...guess it's close to normal? I don't know what percentage of normal size would be considered unusually small.

There's no real point to all this, I just thought it was interesting. Maybe if Dr. S. isn't being dickish the next time I see him, I'll ask him about it. (My husband confessed that he thought Dr. S. was a dick when he met him recently. So it's not just me.)

*Though apparently size doesn't matter as much as whether the uterus will stretch to accommodate a normal-size pregnancy, which you don't know if it will until you get pregnant. This is what I gather, anyway.