Quiz Question

In Wang 2025 et al., on TPLO osteotomy alignment, what was the **intended postoperative TPA** targeted in this study?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Surgeons aimed for a TPA of 3°, which is lower than traditional values, to potentially reduce meniscal contact force and cranio-caudal instability.
Incorrect. The correct answer is .
Surgeons aimed for a TPA of 3°, which is lower than traditional values, to potentially reduce meniscal contact force and cranio-caudal instability.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Fluoroscopy-guided osteotomy placement achieved a median postoperative TPA of (range: 0–4.5°), showing excellent accuracy.
  • The D1 measurement (from patellar ligament insertion to osteotomy exit) was more reproducible and accurate intraoperatively than D2.
  • Median R1 value (D1-based) matched the intended 21 mm radius with only 0.5 mm deviation, while R2 deviated by 2.5 mm.
  • Real-time fluoroscopy allowed dynamic limb positioning and reduced osteotomy placement variability.
  • Intraoperative fluoroscopy reduced reliance on preoperative planning, especially in cases with difficult anatomy or positioning.
  • Radiation exposure was minimal (avg. 3 images per case) and within safe limits using standard protection protocols.
  • Study standardized to 21 mm blades and excluded dogs with developmental orthopedic conditions to reduce confounders.
  • Targeting a lower postoperative TPA (3°) may reduce meniscal load and cranio-caudal instability, though long-term outcomes require further study.

Wang

Veterinary Surgery

7

2025

Accuracy of fluoroscopy-guided osteotomy placement in TPLO: Postoperative tibial plateau angle and preoperative planning evaluation

2025-7-VS-wang-3

Article Title: Accuracy of fluoroscopy-guided osteotomy placement in TPLO: Postoperative tibial plateau angle and preoperative planning evaluation

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, what was the most common **complication** from improper screw placement in CBLO?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Two dogs developed valgus deformities from screws breaching the distal lateral portion of the proximal tibial physis.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Valgus deformity.
Two dogs developed valgus deformities from screws breaching the distal lateral portion of the proximal tibial physis.

🔍 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-2

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 Katz 2022 et al., on meniscal flounce sign, which meniscal tear type was observed in stifles that retained a positive flounce sign?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Radial tears did not abolish the flounce sign, likely due to minimal fiber disruption.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Radial tear.
Radial tears did not abolish the flounce sign, likely due to minimal fiber disruption.

🔍 Key Findings

  • A positive meniscal flounce sign was associated with normal menisci in 95.5% of cases, demonstrating strong predictive value.
  • Absence of the meniscal flounce sign was associated with meniscal tears in 92.7% of cases.
  • Overall diagnostic accuracy of the flounce sign was 94.6%, with 96.6% sensitivity and 90.5% specificity.
  • Most tears in flounce-negative stifles were bucket-handle tears (73.8%), while radial tears were present in some flounce-positive stifles.
  • Radial tears did not consistently eliminate the flounce sign, suggesting they may not disrupt meniscal fiber tension sufficiently.
  • All procedures were arthroscopically performed, with probing and visualization of the medial meniscus' caudal pole.
  • Flounce sign should complement, not replace, probing—especially as some tear types (e.g., radial) may not abolish the sign.
  • Limb positioning and joint distraction may affect flounce visibility, introducing minor observer variability.

Katz

Veterinary Surgery

2

2022

The significance of the meniscal flounce sign in canine stifle arthroscopy

2022-2-VS-katz-2

Article Title: The significance of the meniscal flounce sign in canine stifle arthroscopy

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 Mazdarani 2022 et al., on CBLO and stifle biomechanics, the release of the medial meniscus (MMR) led to which of the following?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. MMR led to earlier and more severe CTT than CCLx alone, highlighting the meniscus as a secondary stabilizer.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Increased cranial tibial translation (CTT) earlier than CCLx.
MMR led to earlier and more severe CTT than CCLx alone, highlighting the meniscus as a secondary stabilizer.

🔍 Key Findings

  • CBLO reduced tibial plateau angle (TPA) from a mean of 28.1° to 9.7°, aligning with its goal of flattening the tibial slope.
  • CBLO eliminated cranial tibial translation (CTT) following CCL transection and meniscal release at all angles except 140° without hamstring load.
  • Hamstring loading (20% quadriceps load) significantly reduced or delayed the onset of CTT, improving stifle stability.
  • Medial meniscus was confirmed as a secondary stabilizer; its release (MMR) caused more CTT than CCLx alone.
  • PTA (patellar tendon angle) increased with joint extension; CBLO shifted the PTA curve lower and parallel to intact values, suggesting effective flexion of the joint.
  • Combined CBLO and hamstring loading resulted in the most stable joints, especially from 50° to 135° joint angles.
  • Residual CTT occurred in CBLO-only limbs at higher extension angles (e.g., 140°), but hamstring load mitigated this.
  • Stifle stability post-CBLO is multifactorial, depending on joint angle, meniscal integrity, and hamstring activation.

Mazdarani

Veterinary Surgery

6

2022

Effect of center of rotation of angulation‐based leveling osteotomy on ex vivo stifle joint stability following cranial cruciate ligament transection and medial meniscal release with and without a hamstring load

2022-6-VS-mazdarani-4

Article Title: Effect of center of rotation of angulation‐based leveling osteotomy on ex vivo stifle joint stability following cranial cruciate ligament transection and medial meniscal release with and without a hamstring load

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 McLean 2024 et al., what was the average increase in TPA among dogs with rock-back?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Dogs with rock-back had an average TPA increase of 3.2° ± 2.6°:contentReference[oaicite:2]{index=2}
Incorrect. The correct answer is 3.2° ± 2.6°.
Dogs with rock-back had an average TPA increase of 3.2° ± 2.6°:contentReference[oaicite:2]{index=2}

🔍 Key Findings Summary

  • 95 TPLO procedures reviewed retrospectively with follow-up radiographs
  • Rock-back defined as increase in tibial plateau angle (TPA) ≥2° from immediate post-op to recheck
  • 21% of stifles (20/95) experienced rock-back
  • Mean ΔTPA among rock-back cases = 3.2° ± 2.6°
  • No implant failures or tibial tuberosity fractures were reported in these cases
  • Plate inclination and exit cut angle (ECA) were not associated with increased risk of rock-back (p = 0.4 and 0.2)
  • Authors hypothesize that compression across osteotomy in vivo may mitigate torsional effects from ECA, unlike in gap-model studies
  • Emphasizes that rock-back is relatively common, even with well-placed implants

Mclean

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopedics and Traumatology

6

2024

Effect of Plate Inclination and Osteotomy Positioning on Rock-back following Tibial Plateau Levelling Osteotomy in Dogs

2024-6-VCOT-mclean-3

Article Title: Effect of Plate Inclination and Osteotomy Positioning on Rock-back following Tibial Plateau Levelling Osteotomy in 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 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 Eskelinen 2025 et al., on Plate–Pin fixation for MPL, what was the rate of patellar luxation recurrence?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Only 1 of 65 stifles had recurrence, indicating 98.5% success.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 1.5%.
Only 1 of 65 stifles had recurrence, indicating 98.5% success.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Plate–Pin TTT fixation resolved MPL in 64/65 stifles with low recurrence (1.5%) and good lameness outcomes postoperatively.
  • Complication rate was 21.5% (14/65 stifles), mostly minor (57%); major issues included pin migration, fracture, or capsular failure.
  • Pin-related issues accounted for 8 of 20 total complications, highlighting implant refinement is needed.
  • No avulsions, TT fixation failures, or luxation recurrence occurred in cases where surgical technique was followed precisely.
  • Surgical deviations increased complication risk 11.3× (p < 0.05), suggesting adherence to protocol is critical.
  • Single-session bilateral MPL surgery had comparable complication rate (3/20) to unilateral surgery (11/45).
  • Screw breakage occurred in 3 cases, suggesting at least 3 screws may be needed for secure TT fixation.
  • Authors suggest temporary pin fixation and later removal may reduce complications, though prospective studies are needed.

Eskelinen

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

4

2025

Outcome and Complications Following Medial Patellar Luxation Corrective Surgery with Tibial Tuberosity Transposition Using a Locking Plate and a Pin Fixation: 45 Unilateral and 20 Single-Session Bilateral Procedures

2025-4-VCOT-eskelinen-1

Article Title: Outcome and Complications Following Medial Patellar Luxation Corrective Surgery with Tibial Tuberosity Transposition Using a Locking Plate and a Pin Fixation: 45 Unilateral and 20 Single-Session Bilateral Procedures

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 Silveira 2022 et al., on GTO in canine THR, which scenario was considered a suitable indication for performing a greater trochanter osteotomy?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. GTO was used specifically in cases with severely medialized trochanters or fixed luxations limiting broach access.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Severe medialization of the greater trochanter or chronic craniodorsal hip luxation.
GTO was used specifically in cases with severely medialized trochanters or fixed luxations limiting broach access.

🔍 Key Findings

  • GTO enabled successful cementless THR in dogs with severe medialization of the greater trochanter or chronic craniodorsal hip luxation.
  • All 5 hips had acceptable long-term outcomes (median follow-up: 48 months) with full function and no persistent complications.
  • Only one major complication occurred—a luxation unrelated to the GTO and successfully corrected with cup revision.
  • GTO facilitated femoral canal access and gluteal preservation, reducing risk of iatrogenic injury during broaching.
  • All GTOs healed radiographically (4 by 6 weeks, 1 by 12 weeks), with no cases of nonunion or implant migration.
  • No complications related to GTO or PTBW fixation (pins + tension band) were observed in any dog.
  • Surgical planning included templating both THR and GTO to ensure ideal alignment and reduce fracture risk.
  • GTO may be especially valuable in luxoid hip dysplasia phenotypes or chronically fixed luxations.

Silveira

Veterinary Surgery

2

2022

Greater trochanter osteotomy as a component of cementless total hip replacement: Five cases in four dogs

2022-2-VS-silveira-4

Article Title: Greater trochanter osteotomy as a component of cementless total hip replacement: Five cases in four 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 Mazdarani 2022 et al., on CBLO and stifle biomechanics, which statement best describes the **patellar ligament angle (PTA)** after CBLO?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. CBLO resulted in a parallel but lower PTA curve, indicating effective flexion induced by the osteotomy.
Incorrect. The correct answer is PTA was consistently lower than intact, mimicking flexion.
CBLO resulted in a parallel but lower PTA curve, indicating effective flexion induced by the osteotomy.

🔍 Key Findings

  • CBLO reduced tibial plateau angle (TPA) from a mean of 28.1° to 9.7°, aligning with its goal of flattening the tibial slope.
  • CBLO eliminated cranial tibial translation (CTT) following CCL transection and meniscal release at all angles except 140° without hamstring load.
  • Hamstring loading (20% quadriceps load) significantly reduced or delayed the onset of CTT, improving stifle stability.
  • Medial meniscus was confirmed as a secondary stabilizer; its release (MMR) caused more CTT than CCLx alone.
  • PTA (patellar tendon angle) increased with joint extension; CBLO shifted the PTA curve lower and parallel to intact values, suggesting effective flexion of the joint.
  • Combined CBLO and hamstring loading resulted in the most stable joints, especially from 50° to 135° joint angles.
  • Residual CTT occurred in CBLO-only limbs at higher extension angles (e.g., 140°), but hamstring load mitigated this.
  • Stifle stability post-CBLO is multifactorial, depending on joint angle, meniscal integrity, and hamstring activation.

Mazdarani

Veterinary Surgery

6

2022

Effect of center of rotation of angulation‐based leveling osteotomy on ex vivo stifle joint stability following cranial cruciate ligament transection and medial meniscal release with and without a hamstring load

2022-6-VS-mazdarani-5

Article Title: Effect of center of rotation of angulation‐based leveling osteotomy on ex vivo stifle joint stability following cranial cruciate ligament transection and medial meniscal release with and without a hamstring load

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 Husi 2023 et al., on TPLO vs TPLO-IB biomechanics, how did the TPLO-IB construct affect rotational stability compared to TPLO alone?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. TPLO-IB reduced internal tibial rotation to levels similar to intact stifles without inducing external overconstraint.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Restored rotational motion to pre-CCLD levels.
TPLO-IB reduced internal tibial rotation to levels similar to intact stifles without inducing external overconstraint.

🔍 Key Findings

  • TPLO alone failed to neutralize rotational instability under tibial pivot compression (TPT), despite a negative TCT.
  • TPLO combined with lateral augmentation (TPLO-IB) restored both craniocaudal and rotational stability to near-intact levels.
  • Cranial tibial translation was 6× greater after TPLO vs intact stifles when tested with TPT (p < .001).
  • No significant difference in cranial tibial translation or internal rotation between intact stifles and TPLO-IB group during TCT, eTPT, or iTPT.
  • TPLO-IB did not overconstrain the stifle, avoiding excessive external rotation.
  • External tibial rotation (eTPT) was more sensitive than TCT in detecting persistent instability after TPLO.
  • Excellent intraobserver reliability for both eTPT and iTPT (ICC > 0.9).
  • Study supports intraoperative use of TPT to identify cases needing additional rotational stabilization.

Husi

Veterinary Surgery

5

2023

Comparative kinetic and kinematic evaluation of TPLO and TPLO combined with extra-articular lateral augmentation: A biomechanical study

2023-5-VS-husi-3

Article Title: Comparative kinetic and kinematic evaluation of TPLO and TPLO combined with extra-articular lateral augmentation: A biomechanical 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: Stifle Joint
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.