Both procedures have their own set of problem. Still, it would be good to know, why (if that is the case), they don't consider you a candidate for ankle replacement.

I have a chronically unstable ankle myself, had surgical debridement of a bone cyst 20 years or so ago and now live with quite a bit of pain. Still, I walk a LOT (about six miles a day) and just ice/heat/NSAID away the pain. A fusion would give so little range of motion that it is not something I want to have to consider, but may have to down the road. More so than knees and hips--ankle replacements still have a lot of issues. I get the impression that most of the surgical advancement on ankle replacement is overseas.

It took me by surprise when he told me I needed the fusion so I'm glad there is one more visit. I'm not having the surgery until I'm sure this has to be done and why this is the procedure to do.
He never mentioned a replacement, I'd like to know his thinking on that. From what I read the fusion lasts forever and the ankle replacement needs replacement every 5-10 yrs, but you can move it.

I'm glad you are doing well!

fusion is considered a "salvage" procedure. Minimal range of motion, but it would allow you to walk.

Do, ask re: possibility of replacement. At one time the advancements were so minimal, it was considered only for elite athletes, but that time has long passed.

I will undoubtedly be facing a similar choice in the future. Best of luck!

From what I have read the problem with the fusion is arthritis developing in the foot which would be doing all the work. I already have arthritis.
Replacements are getting better, they don't have data on the newer ones yet.
I'll keep you informed of how it is going. When you are ready I'll be here for you.

Here's an interesting site: link:http://www.empowher.com/community/share/ankle-fusion-i-know-i’m-not-alone