Quiz Question

In Baldo Clemot 2026 et al., on dynamic MRI in DLSS, how much did the protrusion-to-relative canal ratio (PRCR) reduce on average in the flexed position?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. PRCR reduced by approximately 49.3%, rounded to 50%, indicating significant decompression in flexion.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 50%.
PRCR reduced by approximately 49.3%, rounded to 50%, indicating significant decompression in flexion.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Flexed MRI reduced IVD protrusion, foraminal stenosis, and VBLF significantly compared to neutral position.
  • No dogs had persistent cauda equina compression or foraminal occlusion in the flexed position.
  • Protrusion decreased by ~50% in flexion (PRCR and PACR reductions of 49.3% and 53.1%, respectively).
  • Degree of IVD protrusion correlated with IVD degeneration but not spondylosis.
  • Spondylosis did not limit flexion or affect decompression response.
  • Complete vertebral canal occlusion resolved in all cases when LSJ was flexed.
  • Indirect decompression via distraction may negate the need for laminectomy/discectomy, unless placing an IVD spacer.
  • Findings question the routine use of decompressive surgery with distraction-stabilization in DLSS when good flexion is achieved.

Baldo Clemot

Veterinary Surgery

1

2026

Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbosacral spine in neutral and flexed position for presurgical assessment of clinically affected dogs with degenerative lumbosacral stenosis

2026-1-VS-baldo-clemot-4

Article Title: Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbosacral spine in neutral and flexed position for presurgical assessment of clinically affected dogs with degenerative lumbosacral stenosis

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 Nagahiro 2023 et al., on quadriceps-femoral mismatch, what was the reference value for normal QML/FL derived from healthy beagles?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The reference QML/FL was 0.87–1.00 based on healthy beagle data. Values below 0.87 were considered abnormal.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 0.87–1.00.
The reference QML/FL was 0.87–1.00 based on healthy beagle data. Values below 0.87 were considered abnormal.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Quadriceps muscle length/femoral length ratio (QML/FL) was significantly lower in dogs with grade IV MPL than grades I–III (p ≤ .002).
  • Shortened QML was associated with increased femoral torsion angle (FTA) and increased aLDFA, indicating correlation with femoral deformity.
  • QML/FL increased with age, possibly due to muscular development or reduced deformity in older dogs (p = .004).
  • Grade IV MPL dogs had QML/FL < 0.87, the lower normal limit based on healthy beagles, suggesting clinically significant muscle shortening.
  • PLL/PL ratio (used to diagnose patella alta) was not associated with QML/FL or MPL severity in small breeds.
  • QML/FL can help preoperatively identify candidates for femoral shortening ostectomy, improving femoropatellar alignment.
  • Multivariate regression model confirmed QML/FL is independently influenced by age, FTA, and aLDFA (R² = 0.45).
  • CT-based 3D measurements enabled objective, noninvasive quantification of femoral and muscle alignment parameters.

Nagahiro

Veterinary Surgery

4

2023

Evaluation of the quadriceps muscle length to femoral length ratio in small breed dogs with medial patellar luxation

2023-4-VS-nagahiro-5

Article Title: Evaluation of the quadriceps muscle length to femoral length ratio in small breed dogs with medial patellar luxation

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 Farrugia 2025 et al., on BODPUO location effects, which of the following had **no significant association** with change in ulna angle?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Osteotomy length did not influence postoperative change in ulna angle after adjusting for osteotomy location.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Osteotomy length.
Osteotomy length did not influence postoperative change in ulna angle after adjusting for osteotomy location.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Proximal BODPUOs (closer to 26–28% of ulna length) resulted in greater increases in proximal ulna tilt postoperatively (up to 18°).
  • Distal osteotomies (closer to 48–49%) yielded minimal change in ulna angle.
  • Strong linear relationship between osteotomy location and change in angle; correlation coefficient = 0.73.
  • Initial proximal ulna angle (IPUA) influences results—angles closer to 90° yielded greater changes.
  • Craniocaudal osteotomy angle had minimal impact on tilt change after adjusting for location.
  • Osteotomy length had no significant effect on change in angle.
  • Prediction intervals showed wide individual variation in outcomes, especially with more proximal osteotomies.
  • No increase in complications was associated with more proximal osteotomies, contrary to past assumptions.

Farrugia

Veterinary Surgery

6

2025

Bi-oblique dynamic proximal ulna osteotomy: Effect of location on change in angle of the proximal ulna segment

2025-6-VS-farrugia-4

Article Title: Bi-oblique dynamic proximal ulna osteotomy: Effect of location on change in angle of the proximal ulna segment

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, what major advantage does computed tomography angiography (CTA) offer compared to plastination or cadaveric methods?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. CTA with contrast identifies small vessels not visualized using plastination or cadaveric studies.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Identification of small intrahepatic venous variations.
CTA with contrast identifies small vessels not visualized using plastination or cadaveric studies.

🔍 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-5

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 Farrell 2022 et al., on checklist reliability in OVH simulation, how many OSATS GRS items met the content validity criteria?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Only “respect for tissue” met content validity criteria; the other 5 OSATS GRS items were excluded.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 1.
Only “respect for tissue” met content validity criteria; the other 5 OSATS GRS items were excluded.

🔍 Key Findings

  • 39 of 40 checklist items for simulated OVH surgical assessment had good content validity (CVI = 0.81)
  • Only 1 of 6 items from the OSATS GRS (respect for tissue) met inclusion criteria (CVI = 0.80)
  • Checklist showed strong reliability (G-coefficient = 0.85) for moderate-stakes exams
  • Modified OSATS GRS showed acceptable reliability (G-coefficient = 0.79)
  • Two raters needed for acceptable reliability in high-stakes exams when using the checklist
  • Minimal interrater bias found; variance largely due to interaction among student, rater, and item
  • Digital recordings were a reliable method of evaluating surgical performance
  • Study supports using checklist over OSATS GRS for assessing preclinical students on simulated models

Farrell

Veterinary Surgery

5

2022

Evaluating validity evidence for 2 instruments developed to assess students' surgical skills in a simulated environment

2022-5-VS-farrell-2

Article Title: Evaluating validity evidence for 2 instruments developed to assess students' surgical skills in a simulated environment

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 Wolfe 2025 et al., on endoscopic corpectomy feasibility, at which spinal levels was the technique successfully performed?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The study demonstrated feasibility at all disc spaces from T11–12 through L3–4.
Incorrect. The correct answer is T11–12 through L3–4.
The study demonstrated feasibility at all disc spaces from T11–12 through L3–4.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Integrated endoscopic mini-hemilaminectomy and lateral corpectomy was feasible at all targeted sites from T11–12 through L3–4.
  • Target corpectomy dimensions were achieved or exceeded at every included intervertebral disc space.
  • Median corpectomy dimensions were ~23% vertebral body length, ~47% body height, and ~74% vertebral canal diameter.
  • Thoracic sites required a steeper learning curve, with early failures related to cannula positioning rather than drilling limitations.
  • Angled positioning (30°–60° away from the surgeon) subjectively improved drill trajectory and facilitated horizontal corpectomy access.
  • No rib head resection or rhizotomy was required to achieve target dimensions using the endoscopic system.
  • Excellent visualization of nerve roots and spinal cord was achieved through the 23-mm endoscopic cannula.
  • Incorrect intervertebral disc localization was the most common technical error, highlighting the value of intraoperative fluoroscopy.

Wolfe

Veterinary Surgery

8

2025

Integrated endoscopic thoracolumbar mini-hemilaminectomy and lateral corpectomy in cadaver dogs

2025-8-vs-wolfe-1

Article Title: Integrated endoscopic thoracolumbar mini-hemilaminectomy and lateral corpectomy in cadaver 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 Farrugia 2025 et al., on BODPUO location effects, which variable most significantly predicted the postoperative change in proximal ulna angle?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Regression modeling showed a strong linear relationship between osteotomy location and ulna tilt change (r = 0.73).
Incorrect. The correct answer is Location of ulna osteotomy.
Regression modeling showed a strong linear relationship between osteotomy location and ulna tilt change (r = 0.73).

🔍 Key Findings

  • Proximal BODPUOs (closer to 26–28% of ulna length) resulted in greater increases in proximal ulna tilt postoperatively (up to 18°).
  • Distal osteotomies (closer to 48–49%) yielded minimal change in ulna angle.
  • Strong linear relationship between osteotomy location and change in angle; correlation coefficient = 0.73.
  • Initial proximal ulna angle (IPUA) influences results—angles closer to 90° yielded greater changes.
  • Craniocaudal osteotomy angle had minimal impact on tilt change after adjusting for location.
  • Osteotomy length had no significant effect on change in angle.
  • Prediction intervals showed wide individual variation in outcomes, especially with more proximal osteotomies.
  • No increase in complications was associated with more proximal osteotomies, contrary to past assumptions.

Farrugia

Veterinary Surgery

6

2025

Bi-oblique dynamic proximal ulna osteotomy: Effect of location on change in angle of the proximal ulna segment

2025-6-VS-farrugia-2

Article Title: Bi-oblique dynamic proximal ulna osteotomy: Effect of location on change in angle of the proximal ulna segment

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 Filho 2024 et al., what did %BW distribution analysis reveal in dogs with forelimb amputations?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. %BW distribution between high and low forelimb amputees was not statistically different:contentReference[oaicite:1]{index=1}
Incorrect. The correct answer is No difference between high and low amputation.
%BW distribution between high and low forelimb amputees was not statistically different:contentReference[oaicite:1]{index=1}

🔍 Key Findings Summary

  • 39 dogs (mostly post-trauma) with either forelimb or hindlimb amputations (high vs low)
  • No significant difference in %BW distribution between high vs low forelimb amputations
  • In hindlimb amputees:
    • High amputations → more overload on contralateral hindlimb (p = 0.01)
    • Low amputations → more even load split, slight preference for contralateral hindlimb and ipsilateral forelimb
  • Values derived from pressure-sensitive walkway confirmed with statistical significance
  • Useful implications for prosthesis selection and rehabilitation planning

Filho

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopedics and Traumatology

4

2024

Gait Analysis of Amputee Dogs Using a Pressure-Sensitive Walkway

2024-4-VCOT-filho-2

Article Title: Gait Analysis of Amputee Dogs Using a Pressure-Sensitive Walkway

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 Shetler 2022 et al., on radial head OCD, what confirmed the diagnosis of osteochondritis dissecans in this case?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Retention of cartilage cores and degeneration confirmed the OCD diagnosis.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Histopathology showing retained, degenerative cartilage.
Retention of cartilage cores and degeneration confirmed the OCD diagnosis.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Bilateral radial head OCD lesions were identified in a 6-month-old English Bulldog with elbow lameness.
  • Medial arthroscopic portals allowed only partial visualization of radial head lesions, insufficient for treatment.
  • Lateral arthroscopy portals provided excellent access for fragment removal and abrasion arthroplasty.
  • Histopathology confirmed OCD, showing cartilage degeneration and retained cartilaginous cores.
  • Dog showed complete resolution of lameness and no elbow pain at 5 months post-op.
  • Lesions were caudolateral on the radial head, with discoid elevation of cartilage and clefts.
  • Lateral approach avoids major neurovascular structures, reducing iatrogenic risk.
  • The authors suggest lateral elbow arthroscopy may have broader indications, including for medial compartment disease or synovial biopsies.

Shetler

Veterinary Surgery

8

2022

The use of lateral arthroscopy portals for the management of bilateral osteochondritis dissecans of the radial head in an English bulldog

2022-8-VS-shetler-2

Article Title: The use of lateral arthroscopy portals for the management of bilateral osteochondritis dissecans of the radial head in an English bulldog

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 Dekerle 2022 et al., on ectopic ureter correction, what was the **median duration of continence** after surgery in dogs that became continent?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The median duration of continence postoperatively was 66 months.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 66 months.
The median duration of continence postoperatively was 66 months.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Cystoscopic-guided laser ablation (CLA) was associated with significantly fewer minor complications (13%) than neoureterostomy (100%) (P < .01)
  • CLA resulted in significantly fewer recurrences of incontinence compared to neoureterostomy (0/7 vs 5/12; P < .05)
  • 80% of dogs achieved continence within 1 month postoperatively, with a median continence score of 10
  • Long-term continence was achieved in 88% of dogs, with or without adjunctive treatment, over a median of 66 months
  • Major complications occurred in only 8% of dogs, and all were successfully managed with surgical revision
  • Persistent ureteral remnants were seen only in neoureterostomy dogs, potentially contributing to incontinence recurrence
  • All dogs with incontinence recurrence responded to medical treatment, while only 1/5 with persistent incontinence after surgery did
  • CLA is recommended over open surgery for iEU correction, due to lower complication and recurrence rates

Dekerle

Veterinary Surgery

4

2022

Outcomes of 25 female dogs treated for ectopic ureters by open surgery or cystoscopic-guided laser ablation

2022-4-VS-dekerle-3

Article Title: Outcomes of 25 female dogs treated for ectopic ureters by open surgery or cystoscopic-guided laser ablation

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: Research & Evidence
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.