Quiz Question

In McCagherty 2025 et al., on WID detection accuracy, which feature of the WID aided in guiding wound debridement?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Red fluorescence indicated high bacterial load areas, aiding targeted debridement.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Red fluorescence from bacterial porphyrins.
Red fluorescence indicated high bacterial load areas, aiding targeted debridement.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Bacterial fluorescence was detected in all wounds (17 dogs, 4 cats) using the point-of-care wound imaging device (WID).
  • The WID confirmed the presence of clinically relevant wound infection in all evaluated cases at the time of imaging.
  • No significant difference was found in bacterial yield or burden between image-guided and non-guided swabs (QBC and PCR; p > 0.05).
  • The WID helped guide wound debridement in some cases by localizing areas of fluorescence, especially in necrotic tissue.
  • Most infections were polymicrobial and dominated by anaerobes, highlighting the need for anaerobic culture inclusion.
  • PCR analysis showed low bacterial DNA yields, often complicated by host DNA contamination, limiting its utility.
  • The study did not evaluate sensitivity/specificity of WID, as only fluorescence-positive wounds were included.
  • Clinical utility of WID lies in immediate visual confirmation of infection, supporting timely antimicrobial treatment decisions.

McCagherty

Veterinary Surgery

6

2025

Diagnostic value of a point of care bacterial fluorescence imaging device for detecting wound infections in dogs and cats

2025-6-VS-mccagherty-3

Article Title: Diagnostic value of a point of care bacterial fluorescence imaging device for detecting wound infections in dogs and cats

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 David 2024 et al., on single-port cryptorchidectomy, what was the median surgical time for unilateral abdominal cryptorchidectomy?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Median surgical time for unilateral SP-LAC was reported as 17 minutes.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 17 minutes.
Median surgical time for unilateral SP-LAC was reported as 17 minutes.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Single-port laparoscopic-assisted cryptorchidectomy (SP-LAC) was feasible in 13/14 dogs with abdominal cryptorchidism.
  • Median surgical time was 17 min for unilateral and 27 min for bilateral cryptorchidectomy.
  • All testes were successfully exteriorized through a 15-mm mini-celiotomy in most dogs; only 2 needed slight enlargement.
  • One major complication occurred (testicular artery hemorrhage, requiring conversion to open surgery).
  • Two minor complications involved trocar-related issues (splenic capsule laceration, capnoretroperitoneum).
  • No incisional complications were reported postoperatively; some dogs had mild dermatitis at the clipped site.
  • The technique requires only one surgeon and no advanced tools beyond a single-port endoscope.
  • Low-pressure capnoperitoneum (6 mmHg) was adequate for visualization in most cases.

David

Veterinary Surgery

3

2024

Single-port laparoscopic-assisted abdominal cryptorchidectomy in 14 dogs

2024-3-VS-david-1

Article Title: Single-port laparoscopic-assisted abdominal cryptorchidectomy in 14 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 Petazzoni 2022 et al., on DPO in older dogs, which factor likely contributed to the absence of implant failure?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Locking plates and extra ventral plates likely provided better fixation in mature dogs.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Use of locking plates and ventral plating.
Locking plates and extra ventral plates likely provided better fixation in mature dogs.

🔍 Key Findings

  • DPO improved joint congruity and clinical signs in dogs ≥10 months old with minimal osteoarthritis.
  • Median Norberg angle increased by 21.8% 1 year postoperatively (from 87° to 106°; p < .01).
  • Femoral head coverage increased significantly, with PC rising 66.7% and LHC by 162.5% at 1 year (p < .01).
  • No significant change in pelvic canal width postoperatively, suggesting pelvic conformation was preserved.
  • All ilial osteotomies healed with complete osseous bridging by 8 weeks; 7/11 pubic osteotomies achieved full healing.
  • No intraoperative or postoperative complications were reported, including implant failure.
  • Locking plates and additional ventral plating were used in select cases and may have contributed to implant stability.
  • DPO may be extended to older dogs with suitable hip morphology and minimal OA, expanding traditional age criteria.

Petazzoni

Veterinary Surgery

2

2022

Clinical outcomes of double pelvic osteotomies in eight dogs with hip dysplasia aged 10–28 months

2022-2-VS-petazzoni-3

Article Title: Clinical outcomes of double pelvic osteotomies in eight dogs with hip dysplasia aged 10–28 months

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 Sunlight 2022 et al., on Protein C monitoring, which variable was **not** significantly associated with ultimate clinical status?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Only postoperative PC correlated with clinical status; preoperative PC was not predictive.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Preoperative PC.
Only postoperative PC correlated with clinical status; preoperative PC was not predictive.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Postoperative Protein C (PC) activity increased in 78.7% of dogs, and was significantly higher in dogs with excellent clinical outcomes.
  • Complete acute shunt occlusion resulted in higher postoperative PC activity (96.3%) and better ultimate clinical outcomes than incomplete occlusion.
  • Preoperative PC was not predictive of clinical status, but postoperative PC was associated with improved outcomes.
  • Standard biochemical markers (HCT, MCV, ALB, BUN) also improved postoperatively, especially in dogs with excellent clinical outcomes.
  • Dogs requiring a second procedure had significantly lower postoperative PC (43.5%) than those not requiring further intervention (78.5%).
  • Repeat procedures improved PC and BUN values, with PC increasing significantly after second intervention (to 69.8%).
  • PC normalization (within reference interval) occurred in 87.5% of dogs with excellent clinical status, compared to only 12.5% in those with poor status.
  • Clinical outcome classification (excellent/fair/poor) correlated with biochemical normalization and lack of need for diet/medications.

Sunlight

Veterinary Surgery

1

2022

Protein C and comparative biochemical changes in dogs treated with percutaneous transvenous coil embolization of congenital intrahepatic portosystemic shunts

2022-1-VS-sunlight-2

Article Title: Protein C and comparative biochemical changes in dogs treated with percutaneous transvenous coil embolization of congenital intrahepatic portosystemic shunts

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 Whitney 2022 et al., on CBLO fixation strength, which construct showed the highest **ultimate load capacity** during ex vivo testing?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. HCSTB had the highest ultimate load (1388 N), significantly outperforming other configurations.
Incorrect. The correct answer is CBLO plate with HCS and TB (HCSTB).
HCSTB had the highest ultimate load (1388 N), significantly outperforming other configurations.

🔍 Key Findings

  • CBLO fixation with both a headless compression screw (HCS) and tension band (TB) showed the highest yield and ultimate loads compared to other configurations
  • HCSTB constructs had significantly higher yield load (1212 N) and ultimate load (1388 N) than Plate alone (788 N, 774 N), HCS alone (907 N, 927 N), or TB alone (1016 N, 1076 N)
  • No difference in construct stiffness was detected among the four fixation methods tested
  • All constructs ultimately failed by bone fracture—location of failure differed by construct type (e.g., through HCS hole or cranial screw hole)
  • TB and HCSTB groups showed failure via progressive TB stretching and cranial osteotomy widening, while Plate and HCS failed more abruptly
  • All constructs withstood forces exceeding expected quadriceps load in vivo (170–325 N), suggesting all methods can resist physiological loading, but HCSTB provides greater safety margin
  • HCS alone was not significantly stronger than Plate or TB alone, questioning its standalone superiority
  • Study supports using TB and HCS together for optimal construct strength, but clinical studies are needed to validate implant fatigue, healing, and failure rates

Whitney

Veterinary Surgery

1

2022

Ex vivo biomechanical comparison of four Center of Rotation Angulation Based Leveling Osteotomy fixation methods

2022-1-VS-whitney-1

Article Title: Ex vivo biomechanical comparison of four Center of Rotation Angulation Based Leveling Osteotomy fixation methods

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 Carvajal 2023 et al., on serum biomarkers post-THA, what was the observed trend in CRP levels from preoperative to 6-month follow-up?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The study found no significant change across time points, with CRP levels staying within normal limits.
Incorrect. The correct answer is They remained low and stable.
The study found no significant change across time points, with CRP levels staying within normal limits.

🔍 Key Findings

  • C-reactive protein (CRP) and serum amyloid A (SAA) levels remained low at 3 and 6 months after uncomplicated THA in dogs.
  • No significant differences were observed in CRP or SAA between preoperative, 3-month, and 6-month time points.
  • Mean CRP values were 3.8 mg/L pre-op, 0.8 mg/L at 3 months, and 1.4 mg/L at 6 months.
  • Mean SAA values were 13.9 mg/L pre-op, 14.1 mg/L at 3 months, and 18.4 mg/L at 6 months.
  • All dogs recovered normally with no complications or persistent signs of inflammation at follow-up.
  • Study establishes baseline CRP and SAA levels for dogs post-THA, useful for comparison in suspected PJI.
  • These markers may help differentiate periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) if values deviate from baseline post-THA.
  • NSAID therapy was discontinued by 6 months in all dogs, possibly reflecting decreased inflammation.

Carvajal

Veterinary Surgery

1

2023

Serum acute-phase protein concentrations following uncomplicated total hip arthroplasty in dogs

2023-1-VS-carvajal-1

Article Title: Serum acute-phase protein concentrations following uncomplicated total hip arthroplasty 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 Kuvaldina 2023 et al., in Minimally invasive axillary lymphadenectomy in dogs, which technique was used for access in the minimally invasive procedure?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. A SILS port was used in all cadaveric and clinical endoscopic procedures to enable instrument triangulation.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) port.
A SILS port was used in all cadaveric and clinical endoscopic procedures to enable instrument triangulation.

🔍 Key Findings

  • A minimally invasive endoscopic technique was successfully developed for excisional biopsy of axillary lymph nodes in dogs.
  • The procedure was performed on 4 cadavers (6 limbs) and 3 clinical patients, with no major complications reported.
  • Mean cadaveric time: accessory axillary node 5.1 min; axillary node 33 min. One limb had a double axillary node.
  • In clinical cases, 2/3 were completed endoscopically; one required conversion to open due to node elevation difficulty.
  • Surgical times in clinical cases ranged from 35 to 58 minutes, depending on node accessibility and number.
  • Postoperative morbidity was minimal: no lymphedema, minor seroma or lameness resolved quickly.
  • The SILS port approach enabled effective access, though precise placement was critical to visualization.
  • This is the first reported veterinary endoscopic technique for axillary lymphadenectomy; potential for improved staging and reduced morbidity.

Kuvaldina

Veterinary Surgery

7

2023

Development of a minimally invasive endoscopic technique for excisional biopsy of the axillary lymph nodes in dogs

2023-7-VS-kuvaldina-2

Article Title: Development of a minimally invasive endoscopic technique for excisional biopsy of the axillary lymph nodes 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 Miller 2024 et al., on intestinal obstruction and catheter technique in cats, what key factor was significantly associated with failed RRCT attempts?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Cats with failed RRCTs had a longer median duration of clinical signs (6.5 vs. 2.0 days).
Incorrect. The correct answer is Longer duration of clinical signs prior to surgery.
Cats with failed RRCTs had a longer median duration of clinical signs (6.5 vs. 2.0 days).

🔍 Key Findings

  • Cats with linear (LFBO) and discrete (DFBO) small intestinal obstructions had similar survival (98.2% vs. 97%, p = 1.0).
  • Postoperative complications were not significantly different between LFBO and DFBO cases (p = .1386).
  • Intestinal dehiscence was rare (only 2 cats), both in DFBOs, with no statistical difference between groups.
  • Red rubber catheter technique (RRCT) successfully removed LFBOs in 83% (20/24) of attempts.
  • All failed RRCTs occurred in cats with perforations or tissue nonviability.
  • Cats with failed RRCTs had longer clinical signs pre-surgery (median 6.5 vs. 2.0 days).
  • Surgical time was longer in LFBO cats (median 77 min vs. 58 min, p = .0018).
  • Preoperative septic peritonitis was rare (4/169 cats), but occurred only in linear or mixed FBO cases.

Miller

Veterinary Surgery

7

2024

Linear and discrete foreign body small intestinal obstruction outcomes, complication risk factors, and single incision red rubber catheter technique success in cats

2024-7-VS-miller-2

Article Title: Linear and discrete foreign body small intestinal obstruction outcomes, complication risk factors, and single incision red rubber catheter technique success in cats

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 Buote 2023 et al., on 3D-printed cannulas in feline laparoscopy, what was the effect on mean surgical time?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Use of 3DPCs reduced mean surgical time from 125.6 to 95.2 minutes (*p* = 0.03).
Incorrect. The correct answer is Decreased by 30 minutes.
Use of 3DPCs reduced mean surgical time from 125.6 to 95.2 minutes (*p* = 0.03).

🔍 Key Findings

  • 3D-printed cannulas (3DPCs) reduced mean surgical time significantly in cadaveric procedures (125.6 vs 95.2 min, p = 0.03).
  • Cannula pullout events decreased from a mean of 10 to 2.2 per procedure when using only 3DPCs (p = 0.03).
  • Instrument collisions were significantly fewer with 3DPCs (6.8 vs 2.6 collisions, p = 0.03).
  • Live patients experienced no postoperative complications, including no incision site infections or discomfort.
  • Initial versions of 3DPCs had minor issues, including valve leakage and looser trocar fit, requiring surgical workarounds.
  • Customization of cannula shaft length (3 cm vs standard 5–8.3 cm) improved working space and reduced instrument interference.
  • Production cost was under $5 per cannula, suggesting 3DPCs may be a cost-effective and reusable alternative for small patients.
  • Study supports broader use of 3DPCs in laparoscopic procedures requiring long-jawed instruments or intricate tissue handling.

Buote

Veterinary Surgery

6

2023

3D printed cannulas for use in laparoscopic surgery in feline patients: A cadaveric study and case series

2023-6-VS-buote-1

Article Title: 3D printed cannulas for use in laparoscopic surgery in feline patients: A cadaveric study and case series

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 Planchamp 2022 et al., on imaging-based AAI diagnosis, which measurement had the highest diagnostic accuracy in both head positions?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The VCI had 100% sensitivity and >94% specificity in both flexed and extended positions, with AUCs near 1.0.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Ventral compression index (VCI).
The VCI had 100% sensitivity and >94% specificity in both flexed and extended positions, with AUCs near 1.0.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Ventral Compression Index (VCI) ≥0.16 (extension) or ≥0.2 (flexion) was diagnostic for AAI with 100% sensitivity and >94% specificity
  • VCI had the highest diagnostic accuracy among all measured variables (AUC > 0.99)
  • C1-C2 overlap ≤2.7 mm (extension) or ≤1.8 mm (flexion) also diagnostic for AAI (sensitivity 84–96%, specificity 81–90%)
  • C1-C2 angle ≥176.9° (extension) or ≥187.4° (flexion) had high sensitivity and specificity (~95%)
  • Basion-dens interval ≥5.9 mm (extension) or ≥3.0 mm (flexion) provided moderate diagnostic accuracy
  • Cranial translation ratio (CTR) ≥0.18 classified dogs as potentially unstable (sensitivity 90%, specificity 78%)
  • VCI ≥0.23 reliably differentiated AAI from potentially unstable cases (sensitivity 94%, specificity 94%)
  • DALR ≤0.24 had high specificity (100%) but low sensitivity for AAI diagnosis

Planchamp

Veterinary Surgery

4

2022

Determination of cutoff values on computed tomography and magnetic resonance images for the diagnosis of atlantoaxial instability in small-breed dogs

2022-4-VS-planchamp-1

Article Title: Determination of cutoff values on computed tomography and magnetic resonance images for the diagnosis of atlantoaxial instability in small-breed 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?

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.