Quiz Question

In Moreira 2024 et al., on predictive equations for TPA correction, what was the purpose of the generated corrective equations?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Equations allowed precise planning by adjusting for TLA shift and preoperative TPA.
Incorrect. The correct answer is To select wedge angle achieving 5° TPA while accounting for TLA shift.
Equations allowed precise planning by adjusting for TLA shift and preoperative TPA.

🔍 Key Findings

  • A linear relationship was observed between wedge angle and tibial plateau angle (TPA) correction across all four CCWO techniques.
  • All techniques produced predictable TPA corrections using linear regression-derived equations, allowing wedge angle extrapolation to achieve a target postoperative TPA of 5°.
  • TLA shift (tibial long axis) increased with wedge angle and influenced final TPA; greatest in Frederick & Cross method.
  • Tibial shortening (mTL%) varied by technique, being most severe (up to 40.9%) in traditional Slocum & Devine CCWO and least in newer techniques (7.5–12%).
  • The Oxley mCCWO technique showed lower TLA shift compared to the Frederick & Cross and Christ techniques, though similar to Slocum & Devine; tibial shortening was more pronounced than other modified techniques at wedge angles ≤40°.
  • Techniques varied in craniocaudal translation and wedge apex positioning, influencing planning accuracy and mechanical axis alignment.
  • The corrective wedge angle equations reliably predicted TPA within 4–6° across varied tibial conformations.
  • The study supports equation-based planning over static TPA–5° subtraction to reduce risk of under- or over-correction.

Moreira

Veterinary Surgery

8

2024

Predicting tibial plateau angles following four different types of cranial closing wedge ostectomy

2024-8-VS-moreira-4

Article Title: Predicting tibial plateau angles following four different types of cranial closing wedge ostectomy

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 Story 2024 et al., on surgical correction of excessive tibial plateau angle (eTPA), what was a key rationale for using neutral wedge osteotomies like PTNWO and mCCWO in dogs with eTPA?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Both techniques preserved tibial length better than TPLO-based techniques, making them preferable when length preservation is critical.
Incorrect. The correct answer is They minimize tibial length change.
Both techniques preserved tibial length better than TPLO-based techniques, making them preferable when length preservation is critical.

🔍 Key Findings

  • All four techniques achieved TPA <14°, meeting the threshold for acceptable surgical correction in eTPA cases.
  • Group A (CBLO + CCWO) and Group D (PTNWO) showed highest accuracy in achieving target TPA values.
  • Group B (TPLO + CCWO) resulted in significant tibial shortening compared to other techniques.
  • Group A caused the greatest cranial mechanical axis shift, while Group B caused the least.
  • Group C (mCCWO) resulted in consistent under-correction of TPA, despite aiming for 0°.
  • Modified or neutral wedge osteotomies (Groups C and D) had minimal effect on tibial length, making them suitable when preservation is important.
  • All techniques involved mechanical axis shifts, highlighting the importance of preoperative planning to minimize morphologic disruption.
  • Supplemental fixation was standard for all procedures to reduce risks such as tibial tuberosity fracture and plateau leveling loss.

Story

Veterinary Surgery

8

2024

Morphologic impact of four surgical techniques to correct excessive tibial plateau angle in dogs: A theoretical radiographic analysis

2024-8-VS-story-5

Article Title: Morphologic impact of four surgical techniques to correct excessive tibial plateau angle in dogs: A theoretical radiographic analysis

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 Raleigh 2022 et al., on pericardiectomy complications, which surgical tool was most frequently associated with the onset of ventricular fibrillation?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. In 15 of 16 dogs, electrosurgical devices were used, and VF coincided with their use in 8.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Bipolar electrosurgical device.
In 15 of 16 dogs, electrosurgical devices were used, and VF coincided with their use in 8.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Ventricular fibrillation (VF) occurred in 3% of pericardiectomy cases across reporting institutions.
  • 14 of 16 dogs (88%) that developed intraoperative VF died, indicating high mortality.
  • Electrosurgical devices were used in 15/16 dogs; VF onset coincided with their use in 8 dogs, suggesting a potential but unproven association.
  • Preoperative arrhythmias were seen in 7 dogs (e.g., VPCs, VT, bradycardia), possibly serving as early warning signs.
  • Thoracoscopic approach was used in 75% of cases; however, conversion to open surgery was required in 9/13 thoracoscopic procedures after VF onset.
  • Defibrillation was attempted in 13 dogs, but only 3 converted to sinus rhythm, and only 2 survived postoperatively.
  • VF may result from stray current or cardiac manipulation; bipolar energy devices were implicated despite lower theoretical risk.
  • Preventative strategies include judicious electrosurgery use, close ECG monitoring, rapid CPR preparedness, and preop cardiac risk assessment.

Raleigh

Veterinary Surgery

4

2022

The development of ventricular fibrillation as a complication of pericardiectomy in 16 dogs

2022-4-VS-raleigh-3

Article Title: The development of ventricular fibrillation as a complication of pericardiectomy in 16 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 Devriendt 2022 et al., on EHPSS blood testing, which **two tests** had the highest sensitivity for detecting shunt closure?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. SHA (96.9%) and MEGX T15 (96.2%) were the most sensitive single tests for detecting EHPSS closure.
Incorrect. The correct answer is SHA and MEGX at 15 minutes.
SHA (96.9%) and MEGX T15 (96.2%) were the most sensitive single tests for detecting EHPSS closure.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Fasting ammonia (FA) was the most specific test (100%) for confirming EHPSS closure postoperatively.
  • Serum hyaluronic acid (SHA) and MEGX at 15 minutes post-lidocaine were the most sensitive tests (96.9% and 96.2%, respectively).
  • SHA combined with MEGX T15, or with FA or postprandial serum bile acids (SBA), provided 100% sensitivity with good specificity (72.4–82.8%).
  • SHA levels remained elevated in all dogs with persistent shunting, even when other tests were normal.
  • Paired SBA had moderate sensitivity (90%) and variable specificity (89%).
  • The L/MEGX test at 30 min was less useful than at 15 min for assessing closure.
  • Traditional SBA testing showed reduced utility postoperatively; normal values did not rule out persistent shunting.
  • Blood tests improved when combined, but imaging remains essential to definitively confirm EHPSS closure.

Devriendt

Veterinary Surgery

7

2022

Evaluation of different blood tests in dogs with extrahepatic portosystemic shunts to assess shunt closure after surgical treatment

2022-7-VS-devriendt-2

Article Title: Evaluation of different blood tests in dogs with extrahepatic portosystemic shunts to assess shunt closure after surgical treatment

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 Evers 2023 et al., on medial meniscal tear detection, which aspect of the procedure was significantly more difficult using NA compared to SA?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The caudal horn of the lateral meniscus was significantly harder to probe with NA (*P* = .0017).
Incorrect. The correct answer is Meniscal probing of the lateral horn.
The caudal horn of the lateral meniscus was significantly harder to probe with NA (*P* = .0017).

🔍 Key Findings

  • Needle arthroscopy (NA) had 95% sensitivity and 100% specificity for diagnosing medial meniscal tears in dogs with CCLR.
  • NA missed 1 medial and 1 lateral meniscal tear, both nondisplaced and stable.
  • Visibility of all meniscal horns was significantly lower with NA compared to standard arthroscopy (SA) (P < .005 for all horns).
  • Probing the caudal horn of the lateral meniscus was significantly more difficult with NA (P = .0017), though medial horn probing was similar.
  • Mean NA procedure time was 8 ± 3 minutes, significantly shorter than SA (15 ± 9 min, P = .0041).
  • No increase in lameness observed after NA, indicating minimal procedural morbidity.
  • NA was performed under sedation in most dogs, though 10/26 required additional chemical restraint or short anesthesia.
  • NA was most accurate for displaced vertical longitudinal tears, with all 14 correctly identified; one stable tear and a lateral tear were missed.

Evers

Veterinary Surgery

6

2023

Accuracy of needle arthroscopy for the diagnosis of medial meniscal tears in dogs with cranial cruciate ligament rupture

2023-6-VS-evers-2

Article Title: Accuracy of needle arthroscopy for the diagnosis of medial meniscal tears in dogs with cranial cruciate ligament rupture

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 Power 2022 et al., on liposomal bupivacaine use, what was concluded about its use in off-label orthopedic procedures?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The study found no significant difference in complication rates between labeled and off-label orthopedic uses.
Incorrect. The correct answer is It appeared safe.
The study found no significant difference in complication rates between labeled and off-label orthopedic uses.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Overall complication rate was 19.7% (43/218), with most being mild (CSS 1).
  • Soft tissue procedures had higher complication rates (26%) than orthopedic procedures (11.6%) (P < 0.01).
  • No difference in complication rates between clean, clean-contaminated, and contaminated wounds (P = 0.55).
  • No difference in complication rates between labeled use (CCL surgery) and off-label orthopedic procedures (P = 0.21).
  • Majority of complications (63%) were mild, resolving without intervention or with topical therapy.
  • Severe complications requiring revision surgery were rare (2.3%) and occurred mainly in soft-tissue surgeries.
  • Most common complications included SSI (25.6%), dehiscence (16.3%), and seroma (14%).
  • Liposomal bupivacaine appears safe for use in broader orthopedic procedures beyond current labeling.

Power

Veterinary Surgery

4

2022

Incidence and severity of short‐term incisional complications after intraoperative local infiltration of liposomal bupivacaine in dogs

2022-4-VS-power-3

Article Title: Incidence and severity of short‐term incisional complications after intraoperative local infiltration of liposomal bupivacaine 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 Anderson 2023 et al., on French Bulldogs with humeral condylar fractures, which fixation method was associated with **no** cases of transcondylar screw (TCS) migration?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. No migration was observed in the TCS + plate group.
Incorrect. The correct answer is TCS + plate.
No migration was observed in the TCS + plate group.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Lateral humeral condylar fractures (LHCF) were most common, comprising 63.6% of cases.
  • Transcondylar screw (TCS) + K-wire(s) fixation had a 7.62x higher risk of major complications compared to other methods (p = .009).
  • All cases of TCS migration occurred in the TCS + K-wire group; none occurred with plate fixation.
  • Overall complication rate was 40.9%, with 29.5% being major and requiring intervention.
  • Contralateral humeral intracondylar fissures (HIF) were found in 58.1% of French Bulldogs with CT data.
  • No significant association between age and presence of HIF, but fissure length increased with age (R = 0.47, p = .048).
  • Younger, lighter dogs had higher complication and screw migration rates, possibly due to softer bone and smaller condyles.
  • TCS + plate fixation had the lowest complication rate, suggesting biomechanical superiority.

Anderson

Veterinary Surgery

1

2023

Humeral condylar fractures and fissures in the French bulldog

2023-1-VS-anderson-3

Article Title: Humeral condylar fractures and fissures in the French 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 Larose 2024 et al., on fluorescence cholangiography, how did high-dose ICG (0.5 mg/kg) affect fluorescence contrast early in imaging?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. High-dose ICG increased liver signal, reducing duct-to-liver contrast, especially early.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Obscured contrast due to liver background.
High-dose ICG increased liver signal, reducing duct-to-liver contrast, especially early.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Near-infrared fluorescence cholangiography (NIRFC) was feasible and safe in all healthy dogs studied, with no major adverse effects noted.
  • Low-dose ICG (0.05 mg/kg) at 3 h pre-op achieved the highest target-to-background (cystic duct-to-liver) contrast ratio, reaching nearly 4:1 at 280 minutes.
  • Early imaging (time 0) favored low-dose ICG for optimal cystic duct visualization; high-dose ICG led to excessive liver fluorescence and reduced contrast.
  • Visualization of biliary tree occurred within 10–20 min post-injection regardless of dose, but longer delays improved background clearance and contrast.
  • No significant cardiovascular or histamine-related side effects were observed with either dose of ICG.
  • Repeated ICG injections showed minimal residual fluorescence when using a >72 h washout period; shorter intervals caused mild carryover in high-dose groups.
  • Surgeon scoring matched contrast ratios, confirming clinical relevance of imaging outcomes.
  • Recommended dose for laparoscopic imaging: 0.05 mg/kg ICG given 3–5 h before surgery, or at premedication for urgent cases.

Larose

Veterinary Surgery

4

2024

Near-infrared fluorescence cholangiography in dogs: A pilot study

2024-4-VS-larose2-4

Article Title: Near-infrared fluorescence cholangiography in dogs: A pilot 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?

In Walker 2025 et al., on ventral slot guides, what was the impact on slot position variability when using the 3D guide?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Use of the guide cut variability in slot position by more than half.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Reduced from 63% to 29%.
Use of the guide cut variability in slot position by more than half.

🔍 Key Findings

Design: Ex vivo cadaver study (n=8 dogs, 24 sites)
Comparison: Freehand vs. 3D-printed drill guide-assisted ventral slot (GAVS vs FHVS)
Findings:

  • GAVS produced slots not significantly different from planned dimensions (p = .722–.875)
  • FHVS produced significantly shorter slots than intended (p < .01)
  • No difference in surgical time (p = .071)
  • Shape ratio and slot divergence from midline were similar between groups (p > .4)
  • Use of guide significantly reduced variability in slot position (63% → 29%), shape (65% → 24%), and divergence (54% → 50%)

Conclusion: 3D-printed guides improved accuracy and consistency of ventral slot creation by novice surgeons; supports future evaluation in live dogs and small breeds

Walker

Veterinary Surgery

3

2025

Evaluation of a patient‐specific 3D‐printed guide for ventral slot surgery in dogs: An ex vivo study

2025-3-VS-walker-2

Article Title: Evaluation of a patient‐specific 3D‐printed guide for ventral slot surgery in dogs: An ex vivo 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?

In Larose 2024 et al., on fluorescence cholangiography, what ICG dose and timing produced the highest cystic duct-to-liver contrast during laparoscopic imaging?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Low-dose ICG at 3 h pre-op yielded the best target-to-background contrast (up to 4:1).
Incorrect. The correct answer is 0.05 mg/kg at 3 hours pre-op.
Low-dose ICG at 3 h pre-op yielded the best target-to-background contrast (up to 4:1).

🔍 Key Findings

  • Near-infrared fluorescence cholangiography (NIRFC) was feasible and safe in all healthy dogs studied, with no major adverse effects noted.
  • Low-dose ICG (0.05 mg/kg) at 3 h pre-op achieved the highest target-to-background (cystic duct-to-liver) contrast ratio, reaching nearly 4:1 at 280 minutes.
  • Early imaging (time 0) favored low-dose ICG for optimal cystic duct visualization; high-dose ICG led to excessive liver fluorescence and reduced contrast.
  • Visualization of biliary tree occurred within 10–20 min post-injection regardless of dose, but longer delays improved background clearance and contrast.
  • No significant cardiovascular or histamine-related side effects were observed with either dose of ICG.
  • Repeated ICG injections showed minimal residual fluorescence when using a >72 h washout period; shorter intervals caused mild carryover in high-dose groups.
  • Surgeon scoring matched contrast ratios, confirming clinical relevance of imaging outcomes.
  • Recommended dose for laparoscopic imaging: 0.05 mg/kg ICG given 3–5 h before surgery, or at premedication for urgent cases.

Larose

Veterinary Surgery

4

2024

Near-infrared fluorescence cholangiography in dogs: A pilot study

2024-4-VS-larose2-1

Article Title: Near-infrared fluorescence cholangiography in dogs: A pilot 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: Surgical Techniques & Planning
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.