Quiz Question

In Walker 2025 et al., on ventral slot guides, what slot dimension was significantly more accurate with guide use?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Guided slots were significantly closer to the intended length compared to freehand (p < .01 vs p = .722).
Incorrect. The correct answer is Slot length.
Guided slots were significantly closer to the intended length compared to freehand (p < .01 vs p = .722).

🔍 Key Findings

Design: Ex vivo cadaver study (n=8 dogs, 24 sites)
Comparison: Freehand vs. 3D-printed drill guide-assisted ventral slot (GAVS vs FHVS)
Findings:

  • GAVS produced slots not significantly different from planned dimensions (p = .722–.875)
  • FHVS produced significantly shorter slots than intended (p < .01)
  • No difference in surgical time (p = .071)
  • Shape ratio and slot divergence from midline were similar between groups (p > .4)
  • Use of guide significantly reduced variability in slot position (63% → 29%), shape (65% → 24%), and divergence (54% → 50%)

Conclusion: 3D-printed guides improved accuracy and consistency of ventral slot creation by novice surgeons; supports future evaluation in live dogs and small breeds

Walker

Veterinary Surgery

3

2025

Evaluation of a patient‐specific 3D‐printed guide for ventral slot surgery in dogs: An ex vivo study

2025-3-VS-walker-1

Article Title: Evaluation of a patient‐specific 3D‐printed guide for ventral slot surgery in dogs: An ex vivo 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 Philips 2025 et al., on radiographic IAIP detection, what was the reported sensitivity and specificity of radiography?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Radiography showed high sensitivity (97.2%) but moderate specificity (67.6%) in this study.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 97.2% sensitivity, 67.6% specificity.
Radiography showed high sensitivity (97.2%) but moderate specificity (67.6%) in this study.

🔍 Key Findings

Overall accuracy of radiography to detect IAIP: 77.9%

Sensitivity: 97.2%
Specificity: 67.6%

False positive rate: 32.4% of non-penetrating implants were misclassified as penetrating

Implants directed toward the lateral tibial condyle had higher misclassification (23.8%) than medial (8.3%)

Most accurate detection: Implants placed 2 mm into the joint (97.2% correct classification)

Least agreement: For implants placed at 0 mm (subchondral level), especially lateral (AC1 = 0.48)

No palpable abnormalities (e.g., crepitus) observed during ROM for any group

No significant difference in detection by specialty field or reviewer qualification

Suggests radiographic misclassification risk and supports considering CT/fluoroscopy in equivocal cases

Philips

Veterinary Surgery

3

2025

Detection of intra‐articular implant penetration of the canine stifle with radiography: A cadaveric study

2025-3-VS-philips-3

Article Title: Detection of intra‐articular implant penetration of the canine stifle with radiography: 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 Banks 2024 et al., which surgical factor was significantly associated with under-correction of TPA?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. More distal ostectomy placement correlated with higher postoperative TPA (p = .01).
Incorrect. The correct answer is Increased ostectomy distalization.
More distal ostectomy placement correlated with higher postoperative TPA (p = .01).

🔍 Key Findings Summary

  • Study Design: Retrospective study of 100 radiographs using in silico and clinical data
  • Mean preoperative TPA: 28.6°, higher in small dogs than large (p = .02)
  • Mean planned TPA (in silico): 7.6°, not achieving 5° target (p < .01)
  • Median postoperative TPA: 5.5° overall; higher in small dogs (7°) vs large (4.5°) (p = .06)
  • Postoperative ostectomy position: More distal than recommended; average = 8.6 mm
  • Increased distalizationgreater under-correction of TPA (p = .01)
  • Most accurate correction occurred when ostectomy was ≤7.5 mm from patellar tendon
  • Wedge angle categories (TPA-Pre minus 5–2°) were used based on pre-op TPA

Banks

Veterinary Surgery

1

2024

A mismatch of planning and achieved tibial plateau angle in cranial closing wedge surgery: An in silico and clinical evaluation of 100 cases

2024-1-VS-banks-3

Article Title: A mismatch of planning and achieved tibial plateau angle in cranial closing wedge surgery: An in silico and clinical evaluation of 100 cases

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 Chen 2024 et al., on pressure-measurement tools, why is high precision potentially more critical than accuracy when monitoring portal pressures during PSS ligation?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Consistent readings help guide decisions about safe occlusion levels despite small bias.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Precision allows reliable comparison of pre- and post-ligation values.
Consistent readings help guide decisions about safe occlusion levels despite small bias.

🔍 Key Findings

  • WMg (water manometer with gauge) was the most accurate and precise pressure measurement device.
  • APT (arterial pressure transducer) was less accurate than WMg but still precise; it differed significantly from the gold standard (WMr).
  • CCT (Compass CT) was the least accurate and precise and differed significantly from the set pressure.
  • Mean differences from set pressure were smallest for WMg (−0.020 cm H2O), moderate for APT (−0.390 cm H2O), and largest for CCT (−1.267 cm H2O).
  • All devices showed excellent interobserver (ICC = 1.000) and intraobserver agreement (ICC range 0.985–0.998).
  • Even though the CCT performed least well, all devices had mean errors ≤1.3 cm H2O, indicating potential clinical utility.
  • WMg or WMr should be preferred in surgical settings due to superior accuracy and precision.
  • Measurement precision is more critical than accuracy during PSS surgery, as a 1 mm Hg (~1.3 cm H2O) increase in portal pressure raises odds of poor outcomes by 9%.

Chen

Veterinary Surgery

4

2024

Accuracy, precision, and interobserver and intraobserver agreements related to pressure-measurement devices

2024-4-VS-chen-3

Article Title: Accuracy, precision, and interobserver and intraobserver agreements related to pressure-measurement devices

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 Gibson 2024 et al., on mediastinoscopy in dogs, what lymph node was **most consistently retrieved** using the SILS-port technique?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The left tracheobronchial lymph node was retrieved in all 7 cadavers.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Left tracheobronchial.
The left tracheobronchial lymph node was retrieved in all 7 cadavers.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Mediastinoscopy was technically feasible in large-breed canine cadavers using a SILS port and standard laparoscopic instruments.
  • The left tracheobronchial lymph node (LTBLN) was successfully retrieved in all cadavers (7/7), while cranial mediastinal lymph nodes were retrieved in only 1/7.
  • Postprocedural pleural gas was observed in 4/7 cadavers, likely due to CO₂ insufflation.
  • Instrument limitations with a human-designed mediastinoscope led to preference for laparoscopic instruments and SILS port for improved access and visualization.
  • Complication rates were low, with only two minor (Grade 1) adverse events (pleural tear and LN rupture).
  • Obesity and mediastinal fat were cited as potential challenges to visualization and node retrieval.
  • NASA-TLX workload scores were lowest for tracheobronchial nodes, indicating these were the easiest to access.
  • The authors concluded this approach may facilitate minimally invasive biopsy or resection of cranial mediastinal masses in live dogs, but clinical trials are needed to validate safety and efficacy.

Gibson

Veterinary Surgery

5

2024

Evaluation of mediastinoscopy for cranial mediastinal and tracheobronchial lymphadenectomy in canine cadavers

2024-5-VS-gibson-1

Article Title: Evaluation of mediastinoscopy for cranial mediastinal and tracheobronchial lymphadenectomy in canine cadavers

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 McClean 2025 et al., on shoulder arthrocentesis techniques, what recommendation did the authors make based on safety and accuracy data?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Less than 50% accuracy and significant cartilage injury prompted authors to recommend image-guided injections.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Prefer image guidance to improve safety and accuracy.
Less than 50% accuracy and significant cartilage injury prompted authors to recommend image-guided injections.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Study Type: Cadaveric study using 36 paired canine shoulders (n = 18 per group: Subacromial [SA] and Supratubercular [ST])
  • Survey Results: 75% of clinicians preferred SA technique; 25% used ST
Accuracy Outcomes:
  • Complete accuracy: 50% (SA), 44% (ST) — no significant difference (p = .8)
  • Partial accuracy: 39% (SA), 50% (ST)
  • Complete miss: 11% (SA), 5.6% (ST)
Safety Outcomes (India Ink Assay for Iatrogenic Articular Cartilage Injury [IACI]):
  • Incidence of IACI:
    • SA: 50% (9/18 shoulders)
    • ST: 11% (2/18 shoulders) → statistically significant (p = .007)
  • Lesion depth: All ST lesions were partial-thickness; SA group had one full-thickness lesion (p = .027)
  • Location: Lesions found on glenoid and humeral head with even distribution in SA; only one each in ST
Clinical Implications:
  • Landmark-guided injections were ≤50% completely accurate, even by an experienced operator.
  • ST technique is safer with lower risk of cartilage damage, despite similar accuracy.
  • Findings support considering image-guided techniques to improve both safety and accuracy in clinical settings.

Mcclean

Veterinary Surgery

4

2025

Accuracy and safety of two landmark‐guided techniques for arthrocentesis and intra‐articular injection of the shoulder in dogs

2025-4-VS-mcclean-5

Article Title: Accuracy and safety of two landmark‐guided techniques for arthrocentesis and intra‐articular injection of the shoulder 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 Gleason 2023 et al., on ala vestibuloplasty in cats, what cardiopulmonary parameter showed significant improvement postoperatively?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Normalized pulmonary transit time (nPTT) improved significantly post-surgery (p < .001).
Incorrect. The correct answer is Normalized pulmonary transit time.
Normalized pulmonary transit time (nPTT) improved significantly post-surgery (p < .001).

🔍 Key Findings

  • Ala vestibuloplasty significantly reduced normalized pulmonary transit time (nPTT) (mean 5.43 → 3.89 sec; p <.001), suggesting improved cardiopulmonary function.
  • Clinical respiratory signs improved, including reduced snoring, sneezing, nasal discharge, and open-mouth breathing (all p <.01).
  • Activity tolerance increased, with less dyspnea during activity and longer time to onset of dyspnea (p <.005).
  • Paradoxical sternal motion resolved in all affected cats after surgery.
  • Hiatal hernias resolved in 75% of affected cats on follow-up CT.
  • No serious complications occurred, with only mild, self-limiting epistaxis and hypersalivation in a few cases.
  • Aberrant turbinates were detected on CT in all cats, though only 1 showed obstructive CATs endoscopically.
  • Total clinical severity scores improved significantly postoperatively (median reduction of 30 points; p <.001).

Gleason

Veterinary Surgery

4

2023

Ala vestibuloplasty improves cardiopulmonary and activity‐related parameters in brachycephalic cats

2023-4-VS-gleason-1

Article Title: Ala vestibuloplasty improves cardiopulmonary and activity‐related parameters in brachycephalic cats

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 Townsend 2024 et al., on 3D osteotomy accuracy, what was the mean angular deviation using patient-specific guides?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Mean angular deviation with PSG was 2.8°, significantly lower than 6.4° in the FH group (p < .001).
Incorrect. The correct answer is 2.8°.
Mean angular deviation with PSG was 2.8°, significantly lower than 6.4° in the FH group (p < .001).

🔍 Key Findings:

  • Design: Ex vivo study with 24 paired limbs from normal beagle dogs.
  • Osteotomy types (3 groups):
    1. 30° uniplanar frontal wedge
    2. Oblique (30° frontal, 15° sagittal)
    3. Single oblique (30° frontal, 15° sagittal, 30° external rotation)
  • Comparison: 3D PSG vs Freehand (FH)
  • Main Outcomes:
    • PSG accuracy: Mean angular deviation = 2.8° vs 6.4° in FH (p < .001).
    • 84% of PSG osteotomies were within 5° of target vs 50% of FH.
  • Significant improvements with PSG in:
    • Group 1 (uniplanar frontal) proximal and distal frontal planes (p < .001, .006)
    • Group 3 (SOO) frontal and sagittal planes (p = .002, .043)
  • Time: PSG faster in complex SOO group (84s vs 162s, p < .001); no difference in others.
  • No difference in osteotomy location (mm) between methods.
  • Clinical relevance: PSG more consistent and accurate, especially for complex cuts.

Townsend

Veterinary Surgery

2

2024

Comparison of three-dimensional printed patient-specific guides versus freehand approach for radial osteotomies in normal dogs: Ex vivo model

2024-2-VS-townsend-1

Article Title: Comparison of three-dimensional printed patient-specific guides versus freehand approach for radial osteotomies in normal dogs: Ex vivo model

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 McClean 2025 et al., on shoulder arthrocentesis techniques, which of the following best summarizes the accuracy comparison between SA and ST techniques?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. SA was 50% accurate; ST was 44% — not statistically different (p = .8).
Incorrect. The correct answer is No significant difference in accuracy.
SA was 50% accurate; ST was 44% — not statistically different (p = .8).

🔍 Key Findings

  • Study Type: Cadaveric study using 36 paired canine shoulders (n = 18 per group: Subacromial [SA] and Supratubercular [ST])
  • Survey Results: 75% of clinicians preferred SA technique; 25% used ST
Accuracy Outcomes:
  • Complete accuracy: 50% (SA), 44% (ST) — no significant difference (p = .8)
  • Partial accuracy: 39% (SA), 50% (ST)
  • Complete miss: 11% (SA), 5.6% (ST)
Safety Outcomes (India Ink Assay for Iatrogenic Articular Cartilage Injury [IACI]):
  • Incidence of IACI:
    • SA: 50% (9/18 shoulders)
    • ST: 11% (2/18 shoulders) → statistically significant (p = .007)
  • Lesion depth: All ST lesions were partial-thickness; SA group had one full-thickness lesion (p = .027)
  • Location: Lesions found on glenoid and humeral head with even distribution in SA; only one each in ST
Clinical Implications:
  • Landmark-guided injections were ≤50% completely accurate, even by an experienced operator.
  • ST technique is safer with lower risk of cartilage damage, despite similar accuracy.
  • Findings support considering image-guided techniques to improve both safety and accuracy in clinical settings.

Mcclean

Veterinary Surgery

4

2025

Accuracy and safety of two landmark‐guided techniques for arthrocentesis and intra‐articular injection of the shoulder in dogs

2025-4-VS-mcclean-3

Article Title: Accuracy and safety of two landmark‐guided techniques for arthrocentesis and intra‐articular injection of the shoulder 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 Lomas 2025 et al., on DPO and dorsolateral subluxation, which of the following factors had **no significant impact** on change in DLS score after DPO?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. None of these factors significantly affected change in DLS score, suggesting DPO benefits across patient characteristics.
Incorrect. The correct answer is All of the above.
None of these factors significantly affected change in DLS score, suggesting DPO benefits across patient characteristics.

🔍 Key Findings

  • DPO significantly improved femoral head coverage, increasing mean DLS from 36.1% to 71.4% postoperatively (p < 0.001).
  • No significant change in DLS between immediate postoperative and follow-up scans, suggesting stable surgical outcomes over time.
  • Greater plate angle (30°) yielded larger DLS improvement (mean increase: 39.8%) compared to 25° and 20° plates.
  • Only 3 hips had post-op DLS scores <55%, indicating most patients had lower risk of osteoarthritis progression.
  • No correlation found between DLS improvement and age, body weight, or side of surgery, suggesting broad applicability.
  • CT was used for DLS measurement in simulated weight-bearing, improving precision over radiographic methods.
  • Major limitations included small sample size, multiple surgeons, and variable sedation vs anesthesia during imaging.
  • DPO confirmed as effective for reducing dorsolateral subluxation, improving coxofemoral joint congruency in dysplastic dogs.

Lomas

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

2

2025

The Impact of Double Pelvic Osteotomy on Dorsolateral Subluxation in 24 Dogs

2025-2-VCOT-lomas-5

Article Title: The Impact of Double Pelvic Osteotomy on Dorsolateral Subluxation in 24 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?

Quiz Results

Topic: Imaging & Decision-Making
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.