Quiz Question

In Rodiño Tilve 2022 et al., on feline THR outcomes, which implant feature was associated with all luxation complications?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. All luxations occurred in implants using femoral neck +0 mm, though not all such implants luxated.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Femoral neck extension +0 mm.
All luxations occurred in implants using femoral neck +0 mm, though not all such implants luxated.

🔍 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-3

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 Carrera 2024 et al., what was the only complication reported in the 5-patient case series?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. This was unrelated to the surgical procedure itself and occurred during recovery:contentReference[oaicite:4]{index=4}
Incorrect. The correct answer is Femoral fracture after trauma.
This was unrelated to the surgical procedure itself and occurred during recovery:contentReference[oaicite:4]{index=4}

🔍 Key Findings Summary

  • 5 juvenile dogs (mean age 7.2 months) with grade III–IV MPL were treated surgically.
  • Most had femoral varus + external tibial torsion; some had shallow trochlear grooves.
  • Distal femoral osteotomy was performed in 4/5 dogs; Tibial tuberosity transposition (TTT) in 3/5; Sulcoplasty in 2/5.
  • Mean time to weight bearing: 9.8 ± 5.5 days; healing: 55 ± 24 days
  • No reluxations, and final radiographic values for aLDFA and torsion were maintained at 1 year.
  • One complication due to domestic trauma, not surgical failure.
  • Early surgery appeared to preserve alignment and prevent deformity progression.

Carrera

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopedics and Traumatology

2

2024

Early Surgical Management of Medial Patellar Luxation in Juvenile Dogs

2024-2-VCOT-carrera-5

Article Title: Early Surgical Management of Medial Patellar Luxation in Juvenile Dogs

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 Chitty 2025 et al., on tibial fracture fixation in immature dogs, what was the odds ratio for complication reduction with internal fixation versus external fixation?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Internal fixation significantly reduced odds of complications (OR 0.23, p = .004).
Incorrect. The correct answer is 0.23.
Internal fixation significantly reduced odds of complications (OR 0.23, p = .004).

🔍 Key Findings

Internal fixation (IF) group (n=59):

  • Complication rate: 20.3%
  • Major complications: 15.3%
  • Longer time to discharge if complications occurred (median: 12.5 weeks)

External skeletal fixation (ESF) group (n=36):

  • Complication rate: 55.6% (p < .001 vs IF)
  • Major complications: 52.8%
  • Most common issue: pin tract morbidity

Multivariable analysis:

  • Use of IF significantly reduced odds of complications (OR 0.23, p = .004)
  • Use of post-op antibiotics associated with increased odds of complications (OR 3.53, p = .028)

Fixation choice influenced by age:

  • Older puppies more likely to receive IF (OR 1.25 per week increase in age, p < .001)

Breed & fracture distribution:

  • Common breeds: Labrador, Border Collie, Whippet
  • Common fracture sites: middle and proximal third of tibia

Chitty

Veterinary Surgery

4

2025

Short‐term complications of internal versus external fixation of closed diaphyseal tibial fractures in 95 skeletally immature dogs

2025-4-VS-chitty-3

Article Title: Short‐term complications of internal versus external fixation of closed diaphyseal tibial fractures in 95 skeletally immature 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 Peycke 2022 et al., on CBLO in immature dogs, how many dogs developed **tibial recurvatum** due to over-rotation of the TPA during CBLO?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. One dog developed 10° recurvatum due to overcorrection to protect CrCL avulsion repair.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 1.
One dog developed 10° recurvatum due to overcorrection to protect CrCL avulsion repair.

🔍 Key Findings

  • CBLO was effective for stifle stabilization in skeletally immature dogs with CrCL injuries, avoiding disruption of proximal tibial growth plates.
  • Radiographic union of the osteotomy occurred in a mean of 6 weeks (range: 4–8 weeks), indicating rapid bone healing.
  • Full limb function was restored in all cases by long-term follow-up (mean 23 months), including dogs with initial complications.
  • Two dogs developed 19° valgus deformities due to screw interference with the proximal tibial physis; both were corrected surgically with return to function.
  • One dog developed 10° recurvatum due to over-rotation of the tibial plateau, but retained full function without revision.
  • CCS (countersink compression screw) caused early apophyseal closure in older dogs but had no adverse clinical effects.
  • In contrast, K-wire or plate-only fixation preserved open apophysis, suggesting implant choice may influence growth.
  • No meniscal injuries were observed, and all CrCL injuries were managed arthroscopically — 6 complete, 6 partial, 4 avulsions.

Peycke

Veterinary Surgery

3

2022

Center of rotation of angulation-based leveling osteotomy for stifle stabilization in skeletally immature dogs

2022-3-VS-peycke-5

Article Title: Center of rotation of angulation-based leveling osteotomy for stifle stabilization in skeletally immature 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 Scott 2025 et al., on acetabular cup revision, what was a notable complication observed postoperatively in some cases?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. One case had low-grade infection and osteolysis potentially linked to metal debris.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Osteolysis possibly associated with metallic debris.
One case had low-grade infection and osteolysis potentially linked to metal debris.

🔍 Key Findings

Population: 9 dogs underwent revision of osteointegrated acetabular cups after total hip arthroplasty (THA)

Revision Indications:

  • 7 luxations (5 ventral, 2 craniodorsal)
  • 1 femoral stem fracture
  • 1 aseptic stem loosening

Implants:

  • 8 BFX cups, 1 Helica; all revised to BFX
  • 7/9 required a larger cup than original

Cup removal: Required sectioning with a high-speed burr and modular osteotome; removal fragments extracted

Complications:

  • 1 recurrent luxation
  • 1 low-grade infection with possible metallic debris-associated osteolysis
  • 2 femoral fissures managed intraoperatively

Outcomes:

  • Good to excellent function in 6/6 dogs available at median 621 days
  • Minimal complications with success in re-osteointegration of new cup

Clinical takeaway: Revision of stable, ingrown cups is feasible and offers an alternative to pelvic osteotomies; typically requires upsizing

Scott

Veterinary Surgery

3

2025

Revision of osteointegrated acetabular cup prostheses in nine dogs

2025-3-VS-scott-4

Article Title: Revision of osteointegrated acetabular cup prostheses in nine 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 McKay 2023 et al., on patellar tendon augmentation, which method provided the highest construct stiffness?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The combined TBW group showed significantly higher construct stiffness compared to single-method augmentations.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Combined transpatellar and suprapatellar TBW.
The combined TBW group showed significantly higher construct stiffness compared to single-method augmentations.

2023-8-VS-mckay-1

Article Title:

Journal:

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 Carvajal 2025 et al., on femoral stem breakage, which patient factor was frequently present in failed cases?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. 10 of 13 dogs were heavier than manufacturer guidelines for the implanted stem size.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Dogs exceeding weight guidelines for stem size.
10 of 13 dogs were heavier than manufacturer guidelines for the implanted stem size.

🔍 Key Findings

Incidence of BFX lateral bolt stem breakage: 2.95% (13 dogs, 14 stems)

Implant factors:

  • 13/14 were BFX lateral bolt stems (sizes #5–7)
  • +9 necks used in 5/11 of 17 mm heads
  • 10/14 stems undersized based on radiographs
  • 10/13 dogs exceeded weight limits for implanted stem size

Malalignment:

  • 10/14 had varus alignment (median 3.9°)
  • 8/14 had insufficient proximodistal seating

Breakage site: Proximolateral shoulder in all cases

Revision outcomes:

  • 11 revised (7 CFX, 3 larger BFX, 1 collared)
  • 9/10 revised dogs regained full function
  • Complications: 1 rebreakage, 1 periprosthetic fracture, 1 fixation failure

Histopathology:

  • Electron microscopy showed fatigue striations and incomplete bead fusion

Conclusion: Avoid small BFX lateral bolt stems if undersized or if long necks required; use weight guidelines to prevent fatigue failure.

Carvajal

Veterinary Surgery

3

2025

Breakage of cementless press‐fit femoral stems following total hip arthroplasty in dogs: 14 cases (2013–2023)

2025-3-VS-carvajal-3

Article Title: Breakage of cementless press‐fit femoral stems following total hip arthroplasty in dogs: 14 cases (2013–2023)

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 Horwood 2024 et al., on complications in luxoid hip dysplasia, which intraoperative complication was significantly more common in LH dogs compared to non-LH dogs?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Intraoperative fissure/fracture occurred in 39% of LH dogs vs 16% in non-LH dogs (p = .001).
Incorrect. The correct answer is Femoral fissure or fracture.
Intraoperative fissure/fracture occurred in 39% of LH dogs vs 16% in non-LH dogs (p = .001).

🔍 Key Findings

  • Luxoid hip dysplasia (LH) was present in 8% of THA cases and significantly increased risk of major complications (p < .001).
  • Intraoperative fissures/fractures were 3x more likely in LH dogs vs non-LH (39% vs 16%, p = .001).
  • Dorsal luxation was more frequent in LH dogs (28% vs 4%, p = .019).
  • Acetabular cup placement with ALO >35° was associated with luxation in LH dogs.
  • Morphologic abnormalities (e.g., femoral valgus, lateralization/medialization of cortices) were common in LH and may complicate implantation.
  • Despite higher risk, 94% of LH dogs achieved satisfactory outcomes after appropriate revisions.
  • Younger age and lighter weight characterized LH dogs (mean age 14.7 months vs 40.9 months, p < .001).
  • All LH dogs were treated with cementless stems; prophylactic cerclage was rarely used.

Horwood

Veterinary Surgery

4

2024

Complications and outcomes of total hip arthroplasty in dogs with luxoid hip dysplasia: 18 cases (2010–2022)

2024-4-VS-horwood-1

Article Title: Complications and outcomes of total hip arthroplasty in dogs with luxoid hip dysplasia: 18 cases (2010–2022)

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 Jeong 2025 et al., on contoured saw guide vs jig, what was a key outcome in terms of osteotomy *inclination* on cadaver limbs?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The contoured guide significantly reduced osteotomy inclination deviation, improving perpendicularity (p = .008).
Incorrect. The correct answer is Contoured guide showed more accurate inclination angle (1.2° vs. 4.3°)..
The contoured guide significantly reduced osteotomy inclination deviation, improving perpendicularity (p = .008).

🔍 Key Findings

  • TPLO with the contoured saw guide achieved more accurate osteotomy angles for both inclination and torsion in bone models and cadaveric limbs (p < .05).
  • Medial cortical damage was significantly lower with the contoured guide (247 vs. 1866 pixels in bone models; p < .001).
  • No significant difference in eccentricity (distance between actual and intended osteotomy center) was found between groups.
  • Postoperative tibial plateau angle (TPA) was similar between groups (6.4° vs. 7.6°; p = .15), though both were slightly higher than the target of 6°.
  • Deviation in medial mechanical proximal tibial angle (mMPTA) showed no significant group difference; valgus deformity occurred in both.
  • Osteotomy and device application times were similar between the contoured guide and jig-assisted TPLO.
  • The contoured guide eliminated the need for proximal jig pin, potentially reducing intra-articular pin risk.
  • The guide's multiple pin fixation system improved stability and alignment, supporting safer osteotomy on curved tibial surfaces.

Jeong

Veterinary Surgery

7

2025

Evaluation of a contoured saw guide for tibial plateau leveling osteotomy in dogs

2025-7-VS-jeong-1

Article Title: Evaluation of a contoured saw guide for tibial plateau leveling osteotomy 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 Clough 2022 et al., on CBLO-TTT construct testing, what was the most common mode of failure in the CBLO-TTT specimens?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. This mode occurred in most CBLO-TTT specimens, indicating a weakness at the tension band/k-wire interface.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Displacement of the tibial crest with untwisting of tension band.
This mode occurred in most CBLO-TTT specimens, indicating a weakness at the tension band/k-wire interface.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Combined CBLO-TTT did not reduce load to failure compared to CBLO or TTT alone (P = .81 and P = .12, respectively).
  • CBLO-TTT maintains construct strength without significant compromise compared to individual procedures.
  • Most common failure mode in CBLO-TTT was displacement of the tibial crest segment with k-wire pullout and tension band untwisting.
  • No fulcrum effect was seen in CBLO-TTT, unlike TPLO-TTT combinations, likely due to preservation of buttress effect.
  • Patellar ligament avulsion occurred in both CBLO and CBLO-TTT, but not as a clinical concern — possibly artifact from cadaver model.
  • Load-to-failure testing was static and unidirectional, not accounting for cyclic fatigue or in vivo healing.
  • Plate size and saw blade variation were based on clinical realism, introducing potential variability but not affecting outcomes.
  • Study suggests feasibility of simultaneous surgical correction of CCL rupture and MPL using CBLO-TTT in dogs.

Clough

Veterinary Surgery

3

2022

Combined center of rotation of angulation‐based leveling osteotomy and tibial tuberosity transposition: An ex vivo mechanical study

2022-3-VS-clough-2

Article Title: Combined center of rotation of angulation‐based leveling osteotomy and tibial tuberosity transposition: An ex vivo mechanical 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: Orthopedic Complications
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.