Quiz Question

In Lu 2025 et al., on SOP constructs, what was the **mean mediolateral bending stiffness** of SOP constructs **with** bending tees?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The mean mediolateral stiffness with tees was 43.17 N/mm compared to 41.09 N/mm without (p = 0.0042).
Incorrect. The correct answer is 43.2 N/mm.
The mean mediolateral stiffness with tees was 43.17 N/mm compared to 41.09 N/mm without (p = 0.0042).

🔍 Key Findings

  • Bending tees significantly increased mediolateral bending stiffness, but not craniocaudal stiffness, in plate-bone constructs.
  • Mean mediolateral stiffness was 43.2 N/mm with tees vs. 41.1 N/mm without (p = 0.0042), though the absolute difference was small.
  • No significant differences were found in craniocaudal bending stiffness between constructs with or without tees (p = 0.89).
  • Plastic deformation occurred in all constructs; no screw pull-out or implant breakage was observed.
  • SOP nodes may resist compressive but not tensile deformation, suggesting variable mechanical contributions depending on loading direction.
  • Craniocaudal bending had greater stiffness than mediolateral due to higher area moment of inertia along the node diameter.
  • Clinical relevance of added stiffness from tees remains unclear, warranting further in vivo and cyclic testing.
  • This was the first study to directly test SOP constructs with/without tees over a fracture gap in multiple planes.

Lu

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

2

2025

Comparison of Bending Stiffness between String of Pearls Plate-Bone Substitute Constructs with and without Bending Tees in a Fracture Gap Model

2025-2-VCOT-lu-2

Article Title: Comparison of Bending Stiffness between String of Pearls Plate-Bone Substitute Constructs with and without Bending Tees in a Fracture Gap Model

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 Butare-Smith 2022 et al., on cerclage knot biomechanics, what was the peak load resisted by double-loop cerclage in single-load testing?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Double-loop cerclage resisted a mean peak load of 805 N, the highest among all groups.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 805 N.
Double-loop cerclage resisted a mean peak load of 805 N, the highest among all groups.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Double-loop cerclage resisted the highest peak load (805 N) and maintained tension longer than twist (488 N) and single-loop (397 N) configurations.
  • Double-loop cerclage sustained 500,000 cycles at 60–80% of peak load in some cases without loosening, outperforming other types.
  • Twist knots loosened rapidly, often within 10 cycles even at low loads (100–390 N).
  • Single-loop knots performed better than twist, with partial resistance up to 100,000 cycles at 160 N, but showed wide variability.
  • All loosening occurred before wire breakage, indicating clinical failure would happen from slack, not fracture.
  • Double-loop cerclage had highest initial tension (323 N) compared to single-loop (124 N) and twist (69 N).
  • Fatigue limit was not identified for twist, since they all loosened early at even 20% of peak load.
  • Clinical recommendation: double-loop cerclage is best for resisting repeated subfailure loading, ideal for fissure prevention or fragment stabilization.

Butare-Smith

Veterinary Surgery

2

2022

Double-loop cerclage resists greater loads for more cycles than twist and single-loop cerclage

2022-2-VS-butare-smith-4

Article Title: Double-loop cerclage resists greater loads for more cycles than twist and single-loop cerclage

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 Folk 2025 et al., on vessel sealing device reuse, how many devices failed intraoperatively due to malfunction?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Only one device failed intraoperatively, and this occurred during its first activation.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 1 of 16.
Only one device failed intraoperatively, and this occurred during its first activation.

🔍 Key Findings

40 dogs underwent splenectomy using 16 bipolar vessel sealing devices (VSDs)
Devices were reused up to 4 times after handwashing and ethylene oxide (EtO) sterilization
Biologic debris was found in 100% of devices, specifically under the transection blade, even after a single use

  • Mostly scant (14/16) or mild (2/16) debris

No devices or debris yielded positive aerobic culture after EtO sterilization
EtO sterilization proved microbiologically effective despite visible residue
Perioperative failure rate: 1 device (malfunctioned during first activation)

Folk

Veterinary Surgery

3

2025

Incidence of residual biologic debris and contamination of reused bipolar vessel sealing devices after ethylene oxide sterilization following splenectomy

2025-3-VS-folk-5

Article Title: Incidence of residual biologic debris and contamination of reused bipolar vessel sealing devices after ethylene oxide sterilization following splenectomy

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 Buote 2023 et al., on laparoscopic gastrectomy in cats, which staple type was ultimately used for live feline surgeries?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Purple Tri-Staple technology staples were used in live cats for graduated compression appropriate for stomach thickness.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Purple Tri-Staple cartridges.
Purple Tri-Staple technology staples were used in live cats for graduated compression appropriate for stomach thickness.

🔍 Key Findings

  • LVSG was feasible in 9/10 feline cadavers with successful stapled gastrectomy and minimal technical complications.
  • Stenosis at the incisura angularis occurred in 2/10 cadavers, associated with staple placement too close to the lesser curvature.
  • Leak testing was negative in 8 cadavers and both live cats, indicating effective staple sealing.
  • Mean stomach resection was ~28%, though less than human standards (~75–80%) for metabolic effects.
  • Surgery was performed safely in two live feline subjects, with no intraoperative or postoperative complications over a 6-month follow-up.
  • Technique refinements included orogastric tube placement and custom 3D-printed cannulas to improve staple line accuracy and avoid stenosis.
  • Tri-Staple purple cartridges provided graduated compression suited for feline gastric tissue thickness (~2.5 mm).
  • No need for staple line oversew in live cats; staple-only closure proved safe in this short-term study.

Buote

Veterinary Surgery

6

2023

Laparoscopic vertical sleeve gastrectomy in felines: A cadaveric feasibility study and experimental case series in two cats

2023-6-buote2-4

Article Title: Laparoscopic vertical sleeve gastrectomy in felines: A cadaveric feasibility study and experimental case series in two 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 Wood 2024 et al., on knot security and locking throws, which suture material showed greater holding strength?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Monosyn consistently outperformed PDS in all tested friction knot configurations.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Monosyn.
Monosyn consistently outperformed PDS in all tested friction knot configurations.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Adding a single locking throw significantly increased holding security for specific knots, including the surgeon's throw (p = .0001) and square throw (p = .0002).
  • For the Miller's throw (p = .166) and strangle throw (p = .808), no significant improvement was observed with a locking throw.
  • After locking throw addition, all five knots leaked at similar pressures (p = .5233), and these pressures exceeded physiologic arterial pressures.
  • Surgeon's throw without a locking throw had the lowest leak pressure (62.5 ± 46.2 mm Hg), below physiologic arterial values.
  • The square throw without locking also leaked below physiologic pressures (148.7 ± 109.4 mm Hg), though it outperformed the surgeon's throw.
  • Miller’s and strangle throws performed significantly better than square or surgeon’s throws without locking, achieving leak pressures >200 mm Hg.
  • All knots used 2-0 polyglyconate monofilament (Maxon); no comparisons across suture types or sizes were performed.
  • Authors concluded that correct tensioning and locking throw addition are key to safe vascular ligation. Miller’s, strangle, or slip knots are preferred for challenging surgical fields.

Wood

Veterinary Surgery

4

2024

Influence of a single locking throw on the in vitro holding security of five friction knots using two monofilament suture materials in a canine model

2024-4-VS-wood-4

Article Title: Influence of a single locking throw on the in vitro holding security of five friction knots using two monofilament suture materials in a canine 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 Walter de Bruyn 2024 et al., what mechanical property was completely normalized across all working lengths after orthogonal plate application?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Addition of orthogonal plates eliminated differences in bending stiffness across all working lengths:contentReference[oaicite:3]{index=3}
Incorrect. The correct answer is Bending stiffness.
Addition of orthogonal plates eliminated differences in bending stiffness across all working lengths:contentReference[oaicite:3]{index=3}

🔍 Key Findings Summary

  • Primary 3.5-mm LCP used with short (SWL), medium (MWL), and long (LWL) working lengths
  • Addition of orthogonal 2.7-mm LCP resulted in:
    • Significantly higher bending stiffness for SWL, MWL, and LWL (p < 0.0001)
    • Higher torsional stiffness for MWL and LWL (not for SWL)
    • Significantly lower strain across all working lengths in bending (p < 0.01)
  • Working length inversely related to construct stiffness and directly to plate strain
  • Orthogonal plates eliminated stiffness differences across working lengths in bending
  • Suggests orthogonal plates can improve implant fatigue life and allow compensation when short working lengths are unachievable

Walterdebruyn

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopedics and Traumatology

4

2024

Effect of an Orthogonal Locking Plate and Primary Plate Working Length on Construct Stiffness and Plate Strain in an In vitro Fracture-Gap Model

2024-4-VCOT-walterdebruyn-4

Article Title: Effect of an Orthogonal Locking Plate and Primary Plate Working Length on Construct Stiffness and Plate Strain in an In vitro Fracture-Gap Model

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 Trefny 2025 et al., on plate length and stiffness, what plate–bone ratio was required before significant stiffness and strain differences became apparent?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Biomechanical differences only became significant at the 80% plate–bone ratio (12-hole plate).
Incorrect. The correct answer is 80%.
Biomechanical differences only became significant at the 80% plate–bone ratio (12-hole plate).

🔍 Key Findings

  • 12-hole LCPs (80% plate–bone ratio) showed significantly higher construct stiffness than 6-, 8-, or 10-hole plates in both compression and tension bending.
  • Strain on the plate was significantly lower in 12-hole vs 6-hole plates at all regions of interest (ROIs), especially around the fracture gap.
  • No incremental increases in stiffness or decreases in strain were observed between 6-, 8-, and 10-hole plates—only when comparing to 12-hole plates.
  • Bone model strain adjacent to the plate end was significantly lower for 10- and 12-hole plates vs 6-hole plates under both loading conditions.
  • The threshold effect suggests biomechanical benefits only emerge beyond a plate–bone ratio of ~80%.
  • Working length increased from 9.4 mm (6-hole) to 13 mm (others), potentially influencing strain/stiffness differences.
  • Four-point bending was used, as it replicates the most biomechanically relevant force on plated long bones.
  • Clinical implication: Longer plates may reduce plate strain and peri-implant bone strain, potentially lowering risk of fatigue failure or stress risers.

Trefny

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

2

2025

Effect of Plate Length on Construct Stiffness and Strain in a Synthetic Short-Fragment Fracture Gap Model Stabilized with a 3.5-mm Locking Compression Plate

2025-2-VCOT-trefny-5

Article Title: Effect of Plate Length on Construct Stiffness and Strain in a Synthetic Short-Fragment Fracture Gap Model Stabilized with a 3.5-mm Locking Compression Plate

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 Hawker 2025 et al., on locking head inserts, what was the impact of LHI on plate strain in a fracture-gap model?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. No statistically significant change in strain was observed with any LHI configuration.
Incorrect. The correct answer is No measurable effect.
No statistically significant change in strain was observed with any LHI configuration.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Adding Locking Head Inserts (LHI) to a 3.5-mm LCP had no effect on plate strain, stiffness, or deformation in an open fracture gap model.
  • Peak strain consistently occurred at the Combi-hole over the fracture gap, with values up to ~1837 µε.
  • No significant difference in strain was found across configurations with 0, 3, or 9 LHI (p = 0.847).
  • Construct stiffness and compressive displacement also remained unchanged regardless of LHI count (p = 0.311 and 0.069 respectively).
  • Study contradicted the hypothesis that LHI would reduce strain and increase stiffness under biologic loading.
  • Combi-hole design may limit the efficacy of LHI, as LHI only fill the locking portion, not the compression side where strain peaks.
  • Implant fatigue risk remains highest over unfilled screw holes, especially over fracture sites—confirming previous failure patterns.
  • Surgeons should consider alternative methods to reduce strain when facing high implant load scenarios.

Hawker

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

4

2025

The Effect of Locking Head Inserts on the Biomechanical Properties of a 3.5-mm Broad Locking Compression Plate When Used in an Open Fracture-Gap Model

2025-4-VCOT-hawker-1

Article Title: The Effect of Locking Head Inserts on the Biomechanical Properties of a 3.5-mm Broad Locking Compression Plate When Used in an Open Fracture-Gap Model

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 Trefny 2025 et al., on locking plate biomechanics, which configuration showed higher construct stiffness in compression bending?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Short working length had significantly higher stiffness than long in compression bending.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Short working length.
Short working length had significantly higher stiffness than long in compression bending.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Short working length constructs had significantly higher stiffness and lower strain than long constructs in compression bending (p = 0.0172).
  • In tension bending, short constructs also had higher precontact stiffness and lower strain, but this reversed after transcortical contact (~150 N).
  • Transcortical contact increased stiffness only in long constructs, producing a bilinear load-displacement curve.
  • Postcontact stiffness was higher in long constructs, but this may not reflect clinical benefit due to risks of high interfragmentary strain.
  • Short working length reduced strain at multiple ROIs under both loading conditions, including over fracture gap (Tables 1–3).
  • Increased working length promoted stress concentration and deformation, especially in compression bending.
  • In vitro benefits of long constructs (via contact stability) may not translate to healing, as repetitive loading could increase plate strain and bone resorption.
  • Plate strain was effectively mapped using 3D digital image correlation, confirming regional strain differences between configurations.

Trefny

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

3

2025

Effect of Plate Screw Configuration on Construct Stiffness and Plate Strain in a Synthetic Short Fragment Small Gap Fracture Model Stabilized with a 12-Hole 3.5-mm Locking Compression Plate

2025-3-VCOT-trefny-1

Article Title: Effect of Plate Screw Configuration on Construct Stiffness and Plate Strain in a Synthetic Short Fragment Small Gap Fracture Model Stabilized with a 12-Hole 3.5-mm Locking Compression Plate

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 Hawker 2025 et al., on locking head inserts, what effect did LHI have on axial stiffness and displacement?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. No statistical differences in axial stiffness or deformation were noted between groups.
Incorrect. The correct answer is No significant effect.
No statistical differences in axial stiffness or deformation were noted between groups.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Adding Locking Head Inserts (LHI) to a 3.5-mm LCP had no effect on plate strain, stiffness, or deformation in an open fracture gap model.
  • Peak strain consistently occurred at the Combi-hole over the fracture gap, with values up to ~1837 µε.
  • No significant difference in strain was found across configurations with 0, 3, or 9 LHI (p = 0.847).
  • Construct stiffness and compressive displacement also remained unchanged regardless of LHI count (p = 0.311 and 0.069 respectively).
  • Study contradicted the hypothesis that LHI would reduce strain and increase stiffness under biologic loading.
  • Combi-hole design may limit the efficacy of LHI, as LHI only fill the locking portion, not the compression side where strain peaks.
  • Implant fatigue risk remains highest over unfilled screw holes, especially over fracture sites—confirming previous failure patterns.
  • Surgeons should consider alternative methods to reduce strain when facing high implant load scenarios.

Hawker

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

4

2025

The Effect of Locking Head Inserts on the Biomechanical Properties of a 3.5-mm Broad Locking Compression Plate When Used in an Open Fracture-Gap Model

2025-4-VCOT-hawker-3

Article Title: The Effect of Locking Head Inserts on the Biomechanical Properties of a 3.5-mm Broad Locking Compression Plate When Used in an Open Fracture-Gap Model

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: Material Science & Engineering Concepts
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.