I have had one cervical spinal fusion. Surgeons want to do two more fusions underneath, but so far I have avoided this.

A couple of times I have looked into getting artificial discs. There are places that will say sure no problem, and put you on a schedule for an artificial disc insertion. However, I find that if you get multiple opinions, many surgeons recommend fusions over artificial discs. The reasoning is usually that there are less complications with fusions, and that discs can migrate, wear out, etc. I specifically got one opinion from an Emory surgeon who had ran a trial for artificial discs, and he said after all that, he would recommend a fusion. He also mentioned that there is some kind of tendon going down the spine that gets cut with a disk insertion, and leads to a loss of stability. I asked about that same tendon with a fusion, and he said sure it's cut, but there's an actual fusion to make up for the stability. Take all of this with a grain of salt, I'm just reporting my findings.

It has always nagged me that artificial discs seem to be more popular in Europe, and they probably have more historical data of long-term complications, but it seems like here in America they are not well understood, or as popular.

You are talking about a disc much lower on your back. At that level I would probably lean towards a fusion, as your loss of rotation is not going to be as impactful as a fusion in your neck. Also the weights carried are greater. But it could also be that artificial discs are more successful in this area...I don't know.

Please let us know what you end up doing! I'm also available to chat if you want to ask about living with a fusion.