Hi, I was just comparing his mri reports.

The one from May14, 2003.

The patient's symptomatology is consistent with neuropathy. He does not appear to have symptom's of neurogenic claudication. However he does have significant spinal stenosis.. blah, blah, Surgical decompression for neuropathy would not reliably afford the patient relief of his lower extremity pain. However, if there is radicular component secondary to stenosis, thi smay afford him some pain relief.

Please tell me what radicular component secondary to stenosis means???


Now heres the kicker.

The other mri report (a standup MRI) was done in 2005.

Here's what it says on that one: "There is no evidence of spinal stenosis. The conus medullaris and cauda equina demonstrate normal signal intensity. The conus is within normal limits in size. There is no evidence of an intra-dural lesion.


So here's my dilemma. The first report says "significant spinal stenosis".
the second report says "There is no evidence of spinal stenosis.

How is this possible?

Melody