I had a revision of one half of the prosthesis last year when they found out I'd broken it. That and this year's complete prosthesis revision means I've already had two, and part of the reason I got a new prosthesis made was that the bone loss from the revisions meant the old one wouldn't be long enough any more and I'd end up with one leg shorter than the other if they put it back in. I can only think that's the main reason for them not giving the further revision idea much time when it was brought up a few weeks back. Also, the more they operate the more they are damaging nerves etc. Also, there's the fact that if they did do another revision I'd still have the possibility of this happening again at some point in the future. With amputation, that risk is removed.
I can appreciate these points, but I don't want to be pushed into an (above knee) amputation that I really, really don't want unless there is so little chance of another revision working that it isn't worth the time and effort. It's a lot easier for other people to tell you it is for the best - it's not them facing up to it.
Thanks for the PM BecciJ.
StevePSB