Quiz Question

In Cruciani 2022 et al., on feline pancreaticoduodenostomy, what surgical technique was used to restore pancreaticoduodenal continuity after resection?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The authors performed an end-to-side anastomosis between the left pancreatic duct and the duodenum.
Incorrect. The correct answer is End-to-side pancreaticoduodenostomy.
The authors performed an end-to-side anastomosis between the left pancreatic duct and the duodenum.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Left pancreaticoduodenostomy successfully restored digestive continuity after right lobe and body pancreatectomy in a cat.
  • No clinical signs of exocrine or endocrine insufficiency were observed postoperatively up to 225 days.
  • Histopathology confirmed chronic pancreatitis with abscess formation and reactive lymphadenopathy.
  • No postoperative pancreatitis developed, based on imaging and normal feline pancreatic lipase levels.
  • Progressive focal ampulla-like dilation of the pancreatic duct occurred near the anastomosis without clinical signs.
  • The cat maintained weight and improved clinically for several months post-op, indicating satisfactory outcomes.
  • Surgical technique involved end-to-side anastomosis between the left pancreatic duct and duodenum.
  • Ultimately, the cat was euthanized due to disseminated carcinoma, presumed unrelated to the pancreatic surgery.

Cruciani

Veterinary Surgery

8

2022

Left pancreaticoduodenostomy after removal of the right lobe and the head of the pancreas in a cat

2022-8-VS-cruciani-1

Article Title: Left pancreaticoduodenostomy after removal of the right lobe and the head of the pancreas in a cat

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

🔥100% would expect this on the real thing

🤔Useful, but not core exam material

🗑️Not relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
Mind trying that again?

In Huels 2025 et al., on second-generation screw cup THA, what design feature of the SCSL was intended to reduce acetabular fractures?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. These were developed to reduce insertion torque and thereby lower risk of acetabular fractures.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Finer, self-tapping threads.
These were developed to reduce insertion torque and thereby lower risk of acetabular fractures.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Total complication rate was 16.7%, with 5/30 hips experiencing major complications, mostly related to the femoral component.
  • Cup-associated complications were rare (3.3%), with only one case of acetabular cup luxation attributed to surgical technique rather than implant failure.
  • No cases of late aseptic loosening were observed during a median follow-up of 17.5 months.
  • Implant stability was attributed to the SCSL's porous, trabecular titanium surface, enhancing osseointegration.
  • Three femoral stem fractures occurred in a single dog, leading to implant removal; material testing was not performed.
  • Most complications were femoral in origin (6/7), not acetabular, suggesting improved performance of the SCSL.
  • Explantation rate was 13% (4/30), but some removals were due to owner preference against revision.
  • Subjective functional outcome was full recovery in 26/30 hips, including one with successful revision of stem subsidence.

Huels

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

2

2025

Complications and Long-Term Outcome in 30 Canine Total Hip Arthroplasties Using a Second-Generation Selective Laser Melted Screw Cup

2025-2-VCOT-huels-3

Article Title: Complications and Long-Term Outcome in 30 Canine Total Hip Arthroplasties Using a Second-Generation Selective Laser Melted Screw Cup

Journal: Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

🔥100% would expect this on the real thing

🤔Useful, but not core exam material

🗑️Not relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
Mind trying that again?

In Rodiño Tilve 2022 et al., on feline THR outcomes, what femoral implant size was most commonly used?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Implant size #3 was used in 46 of 56 THRs, making it the most common.
Incorrect. The correct answer is #3.
Implant size #3 was used in 46 of 56 THRs, making it the most common.

🔍 Key Findings

From “Long-term follow up of 44 cats undergoing total hip replacement” by Rodiño Tilve et al.

  • Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) was the most common surgical indication (61%, 34/56 hips), primarily affecting young neutered male cats.
  • All THRs used cemented micro/nano BioMedtrix implants; most common femoral stem was size #3, and most common acetabular cup was 12 mm.
  • Postoperative complication rate was 19.6% (11/56) with 9 major complications (luxation most common), and no intraoperative complications reported.
  • All luxations occurred in hips implanted with femoral neck +0 mm length implants.
  • Second luxations were more common when revision used same implant size; use of larger implants reduced reluxation rates.
  • FMPI-sf score improved significantly from median 2.111 pre-op to 0.111 post-op (P < .001), indicating reduced pain and improved function.
  • Very high owner satisfaction: 91% (30/33) reported outcome as "very good."
  • No significant associations found between complications and variables like weight, sex, implant size, or surgical indication.

Rodiño Tilve

Veterinary Surgery

5

2022

Long‐term follow up of 44 cats undergoing total hip replacement: Cases from a feline hip registry (2010–2020)

2022-5-VS-rodino-2

Article Title: Long‐term follow up of 44 cats undergoing total hip replacement: Cases from a feline hip registry (2010–2020)

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

🔥100% would expect this on the real thing

🤔Useful, but not core exam material

🗑️Not relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
Mind trying that again?

In Nicolas 2024 et al., what spinal level was targeted using the lateral scapular osteotomy approach?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The novel lateral approach was used for a foraminal disc extrusion at T1–T2:contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}
Incorrect. The correct answer is T1–T2.
The novel lateral approach was used for a foraminal disc extrusion at T1–T2:contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}

🔍 Key Findings Summary

  • The lateral approach via scapular osteotomy allowed safe access to the T1-2 foramen in a French Bulldog with foraminal disc extrusion.
  • A mini-hemilaminectomy was performed, preserving articular facets.
  • The dog had no neurologic deficits postoperatively, returned to ambulation within 24 hours, and was discharged in 3 days.
  • At 10 months, CT confirmed excellent scapular healing and no recurrence.
  • Double 2.4-mm locking plates provided stable fixation across the scapular spine.
  • The technique avoided thoracic entry or dorsal spine dissection, suggesting a less invasive alternative for select T1-2 foraminal cases.

Nicolas

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopedics and Traumatology

2

2024

Scapular Osteotomy for Lateral Access to a T1-2 Foraminal Disc Extrusion, Treated by Mini-Hemilaminectomy in a Dog

2024-2-VCOT-nicolas-1

Article Title: Scapular Osteotomy for Lateral Access to a T1-2 Foraminal Disc Extrusion, Treated by Mini-Hemilaminectomy in a Dog

Journal: Veterinary and Comparative Orthopedics and Traumatology

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

🔥100% would expect this on the real thing

🤔Useful, but not core exam material

🗑️Not relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
Mind trying that again?

In Jeon 2025 et al., on distal femoral shortening, which **advantage of DFSO over subtrochanteric osteotomy** is highlighted in dogs?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. DFSO avoids disrupting critical proximal structures needed for stem fixation.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Preservation of proximal femoral anatomy for stable fixation.
DFSO avoids disrupting critical proximal structures needed for stem fixation.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Distal femoral shortening osteotomy (DFSO) enabled prosthesis reduction in all 4 dogs with irreducible luxoid hips undergoing total hip replacement.
  • Median femoral shortening ratio was 13.8% (range: 10.7–15.3%) based on intraoperative tension needed for prosthesis reduction.
  • Bone union was achieved in all cases post-DFSO, indicating good healing potential.
  • Two major complications occurred: one prosthetic luxation and one aseptic stem loosening requiring explantation.
  • One intraoperative fracture of the greater trochanter occurred during trial reduction before DFSO.
  • DFSO did not result in neurovascular injury, even in cases with significant femoral head displacement (>4 cm).
  • Radiographic planning with FHD index and intraoperative assessment were crucial for determining DFSO necessity.
  • DFSO avoids complications linked to subtrochanteric osteotomy by preserving proximal femoral anatomy and allowing secure distal fixation.

Jeon

Veterinary Surgery

6

2025

Distal femoral shortening osteotomy for managing irreducible hips during total hip replacement in four dogs with severe luxoid hips

2025-6-VS-jeon-5

Article Title: Distal femoral shortening osteotomy for managing irreducible hips during total hip replacement in four dogs with severe luxoid hips

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

🔥100% would expect this on the real thing

🤔Useful, but not core exam material

🗑️Not relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
Mind trying that again?

In Takagi 2022 et al., on hepatic venous anatomy, which liver lobe exhibited the greatest variability in the number of veins draining into the left hepatic vein?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The left lateral lobe showed 2–8 draining veins into the LHV, the widest range observed.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Left lateral lobe.
The left lateral lobe showed 2–8 draining veins into the LHV, the widest range observed.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Hepatic venous drainage patterns vary widely across all lobes, especially the left lateral lobe.
  • Right lateral lobe had a median of 2 vessels draining directly into the caudal vena cava (CVC); range: 1–4.
  • Caudate process of caudate lobe had the most variability: 1–5 vessels draining into the CVC; 2 vessels was most common (54.5%).
  • Left lateral lobe drained via 2–8 veins into the left hepatic vein (LHV), with 3 veins most common (31.2%).
  • Left medial lobe typically had 1 vein draining into the LHV (61% of dogs).
  • Papillary process drained into the LHV in 93.5% of cases; 6.5% drained directly to the CVC.
  • Quadrate lobe always had 1 vessel draining either directly to the CVC or via the LHV.
  • CTA revealed more variations than previously described in plastinated or cadaveric studies, highlighting its superior value in surgical planning.

Takagi

Veterinary Surgery

4

2022

Computed angiographic variations in hepatic venous vasculature in dogs

2022-4-VS-takagi-3

Article Title: Computed angiographic variations in hepatic venous vasculature in dogs

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

🔥100% would expect this on the real thing

🤔Useful, but not core exam material

🗑️Not relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
Mind trying that again?

In Latifi 2024 et al., on fascial mapping in the canine hindlimb, which major nerve was highlighted as at risk during dissection in the medial thigh region?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The obturator nerve was located superficial to adductors and could be damaged in fascial dissection.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Obturator nerve.
The obturator nerve was located superficial to adductors and could be damaged in fascial dissection.

🔍 Key Findings

  • This anatomical study mapped fascial planes of the canine hindlimb and pelvis to aid superficial tumor resection.
  • Type I fascia (discrete sheets) was suitable for deep margins in fascia lata, lateral crus, and gluteal regions.
  • Areas with poor or absent fascia included the ischiorectal fossa, femoral triangle, stifle extensor mechanism, and pes.
  • Type IV fascia associated with periosteum (e.g., patella, tibial tuberosity) required partial ostectomy for inclusion in surgical margins.
  • Nerves at risk during deep dissection included obturator, superficial peroneal, and tibial nerves, particularly in regions with weak fascia.
  • In males, bulbospongiosus muscle could act as a fascial plane but dissection was challenging and potentially hemorrhagic.
  • In females, constrictor vulvae/vestibulae muscles were tightly associated with mucosa, limiting clean resection options.
  • Distal hindlimb resections often lacked a usable fascial plane, suggesting that amputation or adjuvant therapy may be more appropriate.

Latifi

Veterinary Surgery

3

2024

Fascial plane mapping for superficial tumor resection in dogs: Part III – Hindlimb and pelvis

2024-3-VS-latifi-3

Article Title: Fascial plane mapping for superficial tumor resection in dogs: Part III – Hindlimb and pelvis

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

🔥100% would expect this on the real thing

🤔Useful, but not core exam material

🗑️Not relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
Mind trying that again?

In Lotsikas 2025 et al., on stifle distraction portal, what structure was specifically evaluated for risk of damage during portal placement?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The LDE was specifically assessed and found to be undamaged in all specimens.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Long digital extensor tendon.
The LDE was specifically assessed and found to be undamaged in all specimens.

🔍 Key Findings

Study type: Cadaveric stifle arthroscopy in large breed dogs (n=12 joints from 6 dogs)
Goal: Describe and assess the proximal lateral portal for insertion of a Ventura stifle thrust lever (VSTL)
Main results:

  • No damage to the long digital extensor tendon (LDE) with this portal
  • VSTL could be placed without removing the arthroscope
  • Portal creation time ~37 seconds (faster than previously reported)

Cartilage impact:

  • Superficial iatrogenic articular cartilage injury (IACI) present in all specimens
  • No difference in IACI between 5- and 10-minute lever durations
  • Zone 4 (lateral femoral condyle) had significantly more damage than zones 1–3 (p < .05)

Conclusion: Portal was safe, repeatable, minimally invasive, and did not increase cartilage damage with up to 10-minute lever use

Lotsikas

Veterinary Surgery

3

2025

Proximal lateral insertion portal of an intra-articular arthroscopic stifle lever: A cadaveric study

2025-3-VS-lotsikas-1

Article Title: Proximal lateral insertion portal of an intra-articular arthroscopic stifle lever: A cadaveric study

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

🔥100% would expect this on the real thing

🤔Useful, but not core exam material

🗑️Not relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
Mind trying that again?

In Lin 2025 et al., on surgical approaches to the radius, how did the anatomical tilt of the radius affect approach selection?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. CLA matched lateral tilt of proximal radius, reducing need for proximal plate contouring.
Incorrect. The correct answer is CLA followed natural tilt, needed less plate twist.
CLA matched lateral tilt of proximal radius, reducing need for proximal plate contouring.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Craniolateral approach (CLA) exposed significantly more radial surface area than craniomedial approach (CMA) (19.4 cm² vs. 13.8 cm²; p = 0.01).
  • Proximal width of exposure was greater in CLA, especially at 12.5% length (P2 level, p = 0.016), aiding plate placement.
  • No significant difference in exposed bone length between approaches.
  • CLA avoided major neurovascular structures, making dissection cleaner and safer proximally.
  • CMA consistently encountered median nerve/artery/vein, complicating proximal exposure.
  • CLA allowed better access to proximal radius for locking plate application, which may benefit MIPO techniques.
  • CLA also enables ulna fixation via the same incision, whereas CMA requires a separate skin incision.
  • Anatomical tilt of the proximal cranial surface favored CLA, requiring less plate contouring than CMA for proper fit.

Lin

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

3

2025

Does the Craniolateral Approach Provide Better Exposure to the Radius than the Craniomedial Approach for Internal Fracture Fixation in Dogs?

2025-3-VCOT-lin-5

Article Title: Does the Craniolateral Approach Provide Better Exposure to the Radius than the Craniomedial Approach for Internal Fracture Fixation in Dogs?

Journal: Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

🔥100% would expect this on the real thing

🤔Useful, but not core exam material

🗑️Not relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
Mind trying that again?

In Espinel Rupérez 2023 et al., in Arthroscopic-assisted hip toggle stabilization in cats, what proportion of deviations from the intended technique were major?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Major deviations occurred in 8/13 cases, all related to femoral tunnel placement accuracy.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 8 out of 13.
Major deviations occurred in 8/13 cases, all related to femoral tunnel placement accuracy.

🔍 Key Findings

  • 14 joints from 7 cat cadavers underwent AA-HTS successfully.
  • Median surgical time: 46.5 min (29–144), including 7 min for arthroscopy and 40 min for toggle placement.
  • Intraoperative complications in 5/14 joints: 4 related to femoral tunnel creation, 1 toggle lodging.
  • Toggle passage through femoral tunnel was the most challenging step, mildly difficult in 6 joints.
  • Cartilage injury occurred in 10 joints, but all were minor (<10% of cartilage area).
  • 13 deviations from planned technique were identified (8 major, 5 minor), all involving femoral tunnel placement.
  • No neurovascular, intrapelvic, or major periarticular injuries occurred.
  • Authors conclude: AA-HTS is feasible in cats, but associated with high rates of minor iatrogenic cartilage damage, intra-op complications, and technique deviations.

Espinel Rupérez

Veterinary Surgery

7

2023

Arthroscopic-assisted hip toggle stabilization in cats: An ex vivo feasibility study

2023-7-VS-espinel-4

Article Title: Arthroscopic-assisted hip toggle stabilization in cats: An ex vivo feasibility study

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

🔥100% would expect this on the real thing

🤔Useful, but not core exam material

🗑️Not relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
Mind trying that again?

Quiz Results

Topic: Anatomy & Surgical Approach
70%

You answered 7 out of 10 questions correctly

Question 1:

❌ Incorrect. You answered: Answer

Correct answer:

Rationale

Question 1:

✅ Correct! You answered: Answer

Rationale

Author: Journal Name - 2025

Article Title

Key Findings

Something off with this question?
Tell us what needs fixing—drop your note below.

You’re flagging: [question text]

Thanks for your feedback!
We’ll review your comment as soon as possible.
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.