Altough superior soft tissue contrast and direct multiplanar imaging capability of MRI are well recognized, myelography has been the imaging modality of choice in evaluationg cervical root injury. We assessed the role of MRI and compared its diagnostic accuracy with myelography in the evaluation of cervical root injury. MR findings of cervical root injury in ten patients (55 roots) were retrospectively reviewed. In 26 explored roots(6 patients). MR findings were compared with myelography and surgical results. In 29 roots (8 patients), which were confirmed by myelography or exploration, the MR findings were focal extraudral CSF collections (pseudomeningocele) in 21/29 (72.4%, 8 patients), thickening of extradural roots in 4/29 (13.6%, 5 patients), and thickening of dura in 12/29 (41.4%, 6 patients) roots. T2-weighted axial image was superior to T1-weighted and proton-density-weighted images for delineation root avulsion. The sensitivity and specificity of MRI were 72.7% and 93.3% respectively, while those of myelography were 83% and 90%. Overall diagnostic accuracy of MRI and myelography were comparable (84.6% vs 87.5%). In conclusion, myelography is still considered as the modality of choice in the preoperative evaluation of the cervical root avulsion because of its higher sensitivity. MRI, however, may obviate the myelography with some technical refinements