Quiz Question

In Nicolas 2024 et al., what was a key advantage of the lateral scapular osteotomy approach versus dorsal or ventral routes?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The approach offered good foramen access while preserving articular facets and minimizing spinal disruption:contentReference[oaicite:3]{index=3}
Incorrect. The correct answer is Avoided thoracic entry and preserved vertebral stability.
The approach offered good foramen access while preserving articular facets and minimizing spinal disruption:contentReference[oaicite:3]{index=3}

🔍 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-4

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 Papacella-Beugger 2024 et al., on neuronavigation, what percentage of screws were deemed appropriately placed?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. 85% (17/20) of screws were well-positioned using spinal neuronavigation:contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}
Incorrect. The correct answer is 85%.
85% (17/20) of screws were well-positioned using spinal neuronavigation:contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}

🔍 Key Findings Summary

  • Cadaveric study using 3 miniature breed dogs (6 hemipelves) to assess spinal neuronavigation accuracy for lumbar plate fixation
  • 20 screws placed using CBCT-based navigation with real-time tracking
  • 85% (17/20) of screws were safely and accurately placed
  • Median deviation of screw entry points from plan: 1.8 mm
  • All 3 misplaced screws occurred in a single cadaver, attributed to inexperienced drill handling
  • Custom 3D-printed lightweight tracking array was necessary due to small spinous processes in miniature dogs
  • No iatrogenic canal perforations or vertebral damage in any specimen
  • Concludes neuronavigation offers precise, safe placement of spinal implants in small dogs, with minimal anatomic disruption

Papacella

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopedics and Traumatology

6

2024

Spinal Neuronavigation for Lumbar Plate Fixation in Miniature Breed Dogs

2024-6-VCOT-papacella-beugger-1

Article Title: Spinal Neuronavigation for Lumbar Plate Fixation in Miniature Breed 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 Ciammaichella 2025 et al., on lymphadenectomy complications, which lymphadenectomy site had the highest rate of postoperative complications?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Ilio-sacral lymphadenectomy had a 41% postoperative complication rate, the highest among the groups.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Ilio-sacral.
Ilio-sacral lymphadenectomy had a 41% postoperative complication rate, the highest among the groups.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Ilio-sacral lymphadenectomy had the highest complication rates: intraoperative (7%) and postoperative (41%)
  • Axillary lymphadenectomy showed the lowest complication rates: intraoperative (1%) and postoperative (16%)
  • Enlarged or metastatic lymph nodes were significantly associated with intraoperative complications (p = .030)
  • Postoperative complications were mostly minor (Grade 1) and self-limiting (seromas, edema)
  • Medial retropharyngeal lymphadenectomy had intermediate complication rates: postoperative complications in 26%
  • No significant predictors retained significance in multivariate analysis
  • Use of methylene blue was associated with fewer complications, although not statistically significant
  • Complication rates did not result in mortality, and all were manageable; MST was 374 days

Ciammaichella

Veterinary Surgery

7

2025

Complications of medial retropharyngeal, axillary, and ilio-sacral lymphadenectomy in 127 dogs with malignant tumors

2025-7-VS-ciammaichella-1

Article Title: Complications of medial retropharyngeal, axillary, and ilio-sacral lymphadenectomy in 127 dogs with malignant tumors

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 Becker 2026 et al., on lumbar spine PLC biomechanics, what explanation was given for the preservation of rotational stability despite PLCs?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Rotational stability was attributed to the integrity of facet joints and dorsal structures, which were not affected by PLCs.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Facet joints and lamina remained intact.
Rotational stability was attributed to the integrity of facet joints and dorsal structures, which were not affected by PLCs.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Each PLC significantly increased passive range of motion (ROM) in the sagittal and dorsal planes (p < .05).
  • No significant change was observed in rotational ROM after either PLC.
  • First PLC increased sagittal ROM by 2.4° (23% increase); second PLC added 1.0° (8% increase).
  • Dorsal ROM increased by 2.3° after first PLC and 1.5° after second PLC.
  • Second PLC did not cause greater destabilization than the first — both contributed similarly to ROM increase.
  • Failure testing showed that spinal segments with two PLCs failed at 13 Nm, while native spines withstood up to 25 Nm, suggesting reduced load-bearing capacity but not clinically significant under normal conditions.
  • Rotational stability was preserved, possibly due to intact facet joints and lamina, which play a larger role in rotation.
  • Study supports the clinical feasibility of two consecutive PLCs, but cautions against excessive bone removal due to potential for spinal instability.

Becker

Veterinary Surgery

1

2026

Influence of two consecutive partial lateral corpectomies on passive motion of the canine lumbar spine

2026-1-VS-becker-5

Article Title: Influence of two consecutive partial lateral corpectomies on passive motion of the canine lumbar spine

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 Hanlon 2022 et al., on short screw sacroiliac fixation, what was the mechanical advantage of using two short screws versus one long screw?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Two short screws (SLS and SPS) produced >2× peak load, yield load, and stiffness compared to a single long screw.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Peak load and stiffness were more than doubled with two short screws.
Two short screws (SLS and SPS) produced >2× peak load, yield load, and stiffness compared to a single long screw.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Two short screws (SLS or SPS) provided >2× peak load, yield load, and stiffness vs a single long screw (LLS) for SI joint stabilization.
  • No mechanical advantage was seen between the two short screw types (lag vs positional).
  • All short screws terminated lateral to the spinal canal, avoiding spinal impingement.
  • Ventral sacral foraminal impingement occurred in 3 short-screw cases (1 SPS, 2 SLS), all involving the caudal screw.
  • LLS group showed more abaxial displacement at osteotomy sites, suggesting inferior stabilization for concurrent pelvic fractures.
  • Short screw constructs had longer total screw length (48 mm) than LLS (40 mm), contributing to increased stiffness.
  • Positioning of caudal screw in a cranial/craniodorsal trajectory may help avoid nerve foraminal injury.
  • No significant difference in displacement at peak load among groups; stiffness and load capacity were the primary benefits.

Hanlon

Veterinary Surgery

7

2022

Mechanical evaluation of canine sacroiliac joint stabilization using two short screws

2022-7-VS-hanlon-1

Article Title: Mechanical evaluation of canine sacroiliac joint stabilization using two short screws

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 Violini 2024 et al., on 3D-guided spinal stabilization in brachycephalic dogs, which of the following best describes the utility of 3D-printed drill guides?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. 3D-PSGs enabled accurate pedicle screw placement in small deformed vertebrae of brachycephalic dogs:contentReference[oaicite:4]{index=4}.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Enabled screw placement in deformed vertebrae.
3D-PSGs enabled accurate pedicle screw placement in small deformed vertebrae of brachycephalic dogs:contentReference[oaicite:4]{index=4}.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Spinal stabilization with 3D-printed patient-specific drill guides (3D-PSGs) was safe, with no immediate perioperative complications reported.
  • 84% of pedicle screws were optimally placed, and only 0.5% breached the spinal canal, reflecting high placement accuracy.
  • 80% of dogs experienced no neurologic deterioration postoperatively, indicating reliable short-term safety.
  • 3D-PSGs were accurate and reproducible, even across multiple institutions and surgeons.
  • Mid-term outcomes were favorable: all dogs were ambulatory, and 90% had static or improved neurologic signs.
  • 7 of 10 mid-term follow-ups showed abnormal gait, though owners rated lifestyle ≥3/5, suggesting acceptable function.
  • 3D-printed guides enabled precise pedicle screw placement in deformed vertebrae, expanding options in small breeds.
  • One dog suffered a T4 spinous process fracture due to overextension of PMMA cement, emphasizing the need for cement placement caution.

Violini

Veterinary Surgery

4

2024

Clinical outcomes of 20 brachycephalic dogs with thoracolumbar spinal deformities causing neurological signs treated with spinal stabilization using 3D-printed patient-specific drill guides

2024-4-VS-violini-5

Article Title: Clinical outcomes of 20 brachycephalic dogs with thoracolumbar spinal deformities causing neurological signs treated with spinal stabilization using 3D-printed patient-specific drill guides

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 Guevara 2024 et al., on implant placement accuracy, what was the rate of acceptable pin placement using 3D-printed guides?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The 3DPG group had an acceptable placement rate of 87.5% vs 69.8% in FH group.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 87.5%.
The 3DPG group had an acceptable placement rate of 87.5% vs 69.8% in FH group.

🔍 Key Findings:

  • Sample: 24 canine cadavers, 477 total pins across 240 vertebrae.
  • Technique Comparison: 3D printed guides (3DPG) vs freehand (FH).
  • Acceptable Placement Rates: 3DPG = 87.5%, FH = 69.8% (p < .0001).
  • Odds Ratio for FH: 0.28 (95% CI 0.16–0.47), significantly less likely to yield acceptable placement.
  • Worst Accuracy Locations: T10 (OR 0.10), T11 (OR 0.35).
  • Surgeon Impact: Surgeon 2 outperformed others (OR 9.61, p = .001).
  • Modified Zdichavsky Classification used to score implant accuracy (Grades I–IIIb).
  • Primary Benefit of 3DPG: Increased safety and precision, regardless of surgeon experience.

Guevara

Veterinary Surgery

2

2024

Ex vivo comparison of pin placement with patient-specific drill guides or freehand technique in canine cadaveric spines

2024-2-VS-guevara-1

Article Title: Ex vivo comparison of pin placement with patient-specific drill guides or freehand technique in canine cadaveric spines

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 İnal 2025 et al., on supracutaneous locking plates, what was one key advantage of SLPs over external skeletal fixation in bilateral fractures?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The SLP design prevented interference in bilateral applications, unlike bulky external fixators.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Reduced bulk, no entanglement.
The SLP design prevented interference in bilateral applications, unlike bulky external fixators.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Supracutaneous locking plates (SLPs) were successfully used to manage 33 diaphyseal fractures (radial–ulnar and tibial) in 30 cats and dogs.
  • Median fracture healing time was 50.5 days (range: 27–88), with most patients regaining limb use within days postoperatively.
  • CT-based metrics (callus area, HU, and 3D bone volume) increased significantly during healing (p < 0.05), validating CT as a quantitative tool for assessing healing.
  • Complications were minimal: minor in 15/33 (e.g., screw tract discharge, edema), and major in 3/33 (e.g., implant failure, delayed union, nonunion).
  • Minimally invasive osteosynthesis required longer surgery times than closed reduction (p < 0.05), but both techniques were viable.
  • SLPs enabled successful bilateral fracture management without inter-plate interference due to their compact design.
  • Screw orientation challenges were noted in cats, especially with cranial application to the radius due to narrow anatomy.
  • Polyaxial locking screws were used safely and did not dislodge, allowing for angular insertion (≤10°) to avoid neurovascular structures.

İnal

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

5

2025

Minimally Invasive Radial–Ulnar and Tibial Fracture Management with Supracutaneous Locking Plates in Dogs and Cats

2025-5-VCOT-inal-5

Article Title: Minimally Invasive Radial–Ulnar and Tibial Fracture Management with Supracutaneous Locking Plates in Dogs and Cats

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 Guevara 2024 et al., on implant placement accuracy, which vertebra had the lowest odds of acceptable pin placement?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. T10 had the lowest OR for success (0.10), likely due to anatomical and guide design complexity.
Incorrect. The correct answer is T10.
T10 had the lowest OR for success (0.10), likely due to anatomical and guide design complexity.

🔍 Key Findings:

  • Sample: 24 canine cadavers, 477 total pins across 240 vertebrae.
  • Technique Comparison: 3D printed guides (3DPG) vs freehand (FH).
  • Acceptable Placement Rates: 3DPG = 87.5%, FH = 69.8% (p < .0001).
  • Odds Ratio for FH: 0.28 (95% CI 0.16–0.47), significantly less likely to yield acceptable placement.
  • Worst Accuracy Locations: T10 (OR 0.10), T11 (OR 0.35).
  • Surgeon Impact: Surgeon 2 outperformed others (OR 9.61, p = .001).
  • Modified Zdichavsky Classification used to score implant accuracy (Grades I–IIIb).
  • Primary Benefit of 3DPG: Increased safety and precision, regardless of surgeon experience.

Guevara

Veterinary Surgery

2

2024

Ex vivo comparison of pin placement with patient-specific drill guides or freehand technique in canine cadaveric spines

2024-2-VS-guevara-3

Article Title: Ex vivo comparison of pin placement with patient-specific drill guides or freehand technique in canine cadaveric spines

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: Pelvic & Spinal Surgery
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.