I've not had spur removal, and I'm sorry that it's something that you're having to make a decision about having. (I do have bone spurs, only surgery for that, alone, hasn't been something my doctors favor).

From what you've written it sounds as if the spurs are impinging on or compressing nerves - as do mine.

Did you get opinions from more than one neuro or ortho surgeon?

I was 6 months into pain before I was referred to surgeons. My insurance mandates conservative treatment for, at least, 12 weeks.

Possibly, I've read incorrectly, yet it seems you stated that your pain has persisted 6 weeks.

Most patients seek opinions or consults from at least 2 or 3 surgeons before deciding on surgery.

You've probably done that, too.

From what I understand by people whom have undergone fusion self-donating (hip bone): It may, not that it will, cause a secondary layer of problems. Some experience hip problems/conditions as an effect. Because it is self-donation, it could also improve the chances of fusion "taking" and less risk of "rejection" and non-fusion.

Has the surgeon discussed all of this with you as thoroughly as possible?

Y'know, if you have questions or concerns that have not been addressed to your satisfaction, you can always bump back the date on your scheduled surgery.

I'm not saying you need do so, only, it appears you have more questions than answers and, for me: I'd not have any type surgery if I was not going into the OR feeling totally confident.

I mean, you entitled your post as "spur removal" yet you are also talking about fusion. Is it anterior or posterior? The surgery encompasses more than spur removal.

As long as there is spurring, spurs are most apt to recur.

In all sincerity, it seems that either some info. is missing - that explains why fusion is being done - or possibly that the operation hasn't been explained as fully as it should be.

Why is fusion being done for, i.e., spur removal?