Spinal Stenosis vs. narrowing

[Spaceystac]

I have chronic pain and stiffness and it seems to centralize from my neck. I feel week in the arms, compaired to what I used to be able to do with out causing pain. I used to be the person that helped people move and have no problem carrying 50lbs plus at any time.  Well not any more, just yesterday lifting my 12 lb turkey caused sharp pains down my neck into my arms. Now today I just feel so tired and weak and sore, I could just sleep all day.    
  
   So i guess to my question.  I have an MRI from March of this year. It doesn't say anything about stenosis, but I have bulged disks and bone growths that contact the spinal cord. Also there is annotations of measurements in the canal from the disk bulges to the back of the canal.
This is what they read:
      C3-C4  10.3mm
      C4-C5  12.2mm
      C6-C6   11.3mm
      C7-C8   10.4mm

I also have a "dilated central canal" or tiny Syrinx through the same area. Most prominent from C3 to T-1.

I am wondering if anyone know's what makes them define narrowing as stenosis...or to not. How bad does it have to get before they recognize it as a problem. Are they just noting it so they can compare it later on?   I also have facet joint disease and reversal of my cervical lordosis. I don't know exactly what is the main cause of my pain, but it is hard to tell with so many problems.   I just know lifting or holding weight out in front of me is very painful. And I just can do the things i used to.

If anyone could help with this it would be greatly appreciated. I have not been able to see a neurologist. And I am not sure I will get to see one before my insurance runs out.             Stacey

[Highrisker]

I think you answered it yourself, you said I’m 3mm away from mild spinal stenosis. I have experienced that at even moderate severe stenosis they don’t do anything. That’s on 4 levels with impingement severe on almost every level foraminally on both sides and they still don’t want to do anything.  Also are you sure it’s the radiologist that left it out or revised version from your provider or hospital, it does happen.

[Spaceystac]

So pretty much I am 3 mm away from having mild cervical spinal stenosis, which would be narrowing but I think that must be controversial.  

[Spaceystac]

I did some reading and I think I can answer my own question now.

I read a study     http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC492191/?page=1 Congenital narrowing of the cervical spinal canal.

It says the anything below 14mm is congenital narrowing, but all if the subjects in this study were male and the measurement would be 1mm smaller for a female. So, there for 13mm is considered narrowing.  
The study also explains how most of the subjects had worsening symptoms with more activity, and that this was due to the cord enlarging and taking up more room. The network of vessels on your spinal cord gets engorged with more blood when you heart beat raises, as does any vein when you exercise. It makes it take up more space in a already crowded area.
  Symptoms include things like bladder and bowel dysfunction, (like urgency and frequency), abnormal gait and reflexes, reduced csf proteins in lumbar puncture (CSF fluid isn't getting the nutritional proteins to the lower nervous system which can result in degenerative changes but not in all cases ). Numbness and loss of pinprick sensation in extremities. Many symptoms were found,but a different in most of the cases.
  Quadriplegia was also noted in patients and was reversed with a cervical Laminectomy procedure. It says 4 out of 5 patients symptoms improved with the surgery.
People with this condition are more susceptible to spondylotic myelopathy, or inflammation of the spinal cord and it can be worsened by very minor injury.
    Narrowing of the cervical spinal canal has also been under controversy it seems, like Fibromyalgia  it seems to not be understood by many doctors and these conditions have been linked in recent studies. The study mentioned above is from 1975 and I don't think Fibromyalgia was really known of then, as it is these days. I would have to research that, I'm not sure when FM was made a diagnosable condition.


I am confused on why the radiologist made measurement annotations of the narrowing in my cervical spine but choose not to state it in the findings or  entire report. It says no stenosis, many times. But it does state that I have bone spurs contacting the cord and mild cord deformity from it. Do they not note narrowing at all?
    I have fluid inside my spinal cord in the same area of the narrowing of the spinal canal, this suggests that it has damaged my spinal cord (I believe). Yes fluid in my spinal cord could have been congenital, but regardless the narrowing could make it worse. And to top it off I have reversal of my cervical lordosis so why you look at the mri's you can easily see I have some issues going on in there.
I just don't understand why the radiologist couldn't put two and two together. Why don't doctors look at the images them selves to understand things better. If I were a doctor I would make sure to try and really look at the tests, not just the "results"
I tell my pcp doctor I want to see a Neurologist and I need a referral, she doesn't understand any of my report findings and thinks I don't need to one and refers me to a  Physiatrist and they said I don't fit there criteria.  Just getting it out of my head and off my chest I guess!