Member Comments are provided by individuals and reflect their personal opinions only. Under NO circumstances should you act on any advice or opinion posted in this forum. ALWAYS check with your personal physician before taking any action regarding your health! MedHelp International and our partners, sponsors and affiliates have no obligation to monitor any comments posted on this site, or the content and/or accuracy of such exchanges. MedHelp International does not endorse the views of any user.
Neurology (Expert Forum)
conus medullaris
This forum is for questions and support regarding neurology issues such as: Alzheimer's Disease, ALS, Autism, Brain Cancer, Cerebral Palsy, Chronic Pain, Epilepsy, Fibromyalgia, Headaches, MS, Neuralgia, Neuropathy, Parkinson's Disease, RSD, Sleep Disorders, Stroke, Traumatic Brain Injury.
conus medullaris
by Elen__0__0, Dec 02, 1997 12:00AM
Re: conus medullaris
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Neurology and Neurosurgery Forum ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by CCf Neuro MD *!* on December 02, 1997 at 15:44:24:
In Reply to: conus medullaris posted by Ellen on December 02, 1997 at 14:40:44:
: Recent T-spine MRI showed that my conus medullaries had an
"unusually high termination" at T-11 or just above. However, an MRI
I had of my lumbar spine four years ago, commented that the c.m.
was normal. What could possibly cause the change?
==========================================================================
I would be very interested to see what exactly was meant by the comment
that your conus medullaris was normal on the MRI four years ago, the conus
is simply the name for the tip ( cone shaped ) of the spinal cord where
it comes to and end low in your spinal canal, usually it ends somewhere
between the lower third of the twelfth thoracic vertebra and the disc
between the second and third lumbar vertebrae.
There is a wider variation reported in women and this has some
relationship to the length of the trunk, in your case the termination
is slightly higher than usual but this can fall within the category of
an anotomical variation.
If this is the case, the comment that it was normal a few years ago
may simply refer to the fact that there was no active disease present,
ignoring te anatomic variation. I cannot visualise a situation where the
conus would have actually moved up !
It is not possible to give a definitive answer without reviewing the entire
report with the films but I would suggest this as a possiblre reason for
the apparently conflicting reports.
This information is provided for general medical education purposes only.
Please consult your physician for diagnostic and treatment options of your specific medical condition.
