Your Custom Quiz

In Downey 2023 et al., on thoracoscopic lobectomy, what was the long-term outcome for dogs that survived to discharge?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. One dog had persistent cough due to cardiac disease; others had no recurrence over a median 24 months.
Incorrect. The correct answer is One had mild persistent cough, others had no recurrence.
One dog had persistent cough due to cardiac disease; others had no recurrence over a median 24 months.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Thoracoscopic (TL) or thoracoscopic-assisted (TAL) lobectomy was successfully performed in 12 dogs with non-neoplastic pulmonary consolidation (PC).
  • 44% (4/9) of TL cases were converted to open thoracotomy due to adhesions or poor visualization—higher than rates for neoplastic lobectomies.
  • OLV was successful in 7/9 TL dogs; unsuccessful attempts were managed with intermittent ventilation, mostly in brachycephalic breeds.
  • Median hospital stay was 3 days; 91.7% (11/12) survived to discharge, and 100% of survivors showed no recurrence at median 24-month follow-up.
  • Complications were mostly minor: pneumothorax (2), minor hemorrhage (3), dehiscence (1), and 1 fatality due to BOAS complications.
  • Histopathology showed infectious pneumonia in 10 dogs, and in 4 cases, foreign body migration was suspected as the underlying cause.
  • Median surgical time for TL was 90 minutes; conversion correlated with longer symptom duration (median 90 vs. 7 days).
  • Postoperative recovery was excellent in all surviving dogs, with one case of persistent cough attributed to concurrent heart disease.

Downey

Veterinary Surgery

7

2023

Evaluation of long‐term outcome after lung lobectomy for canine non‐neoplastic pulmonary consolidation via thoracoscopic or thoracoscopic‐assisted surgery in 12 dogs

2023-7-VS-downey-5

Article Title: Evaluation of long‐term outcome after lung lobectomy for canine non‐neoplastic pulmonary consolidation via thoracoscopic or thoracoscopic‐assisted surgery in 12 dogs

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

In Hanlon 2022 et al., on short screw sacroiliac fixation, what complication was observed in some short screw cases?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Three cases (1 SPS, 2 SLS) had caudal screws impinging the ventral sacral foramina.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Ventral sacral foraminal impingement.
Three cases (1 SPS, 2 SLS) had caudal screws impinging the ventral sacral foramina.

🔍 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-4

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

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

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

In Galliano 2022 et al., on vascular access ports, which group had the highest rate of major and catastrophic complications?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. jSVAP had 2 catastrophic and 3 major complications, including sepsis and port dislodgement.
Incorrect. The correct answer is jSVAP.
jSVAP had 2 catastrophic and 3 major complications, including sepsis and port dislodgement.

🔍 Key Findings

  • SVAPs placed in axillary (aSVAP) or femoral/external iliac veins (fSVAP) during limb amputation remained functional in 92.3% and 100% of cases, respectively.
  • Complication rates were lower in aSVAP (23.1%) and fSVAP (0%) compared to jSVAP (47.4%), although not statistically significant (P = .12).
  • No catastrophic complications occurred with aSVAP or fSVAP; 2 deaths occurred with jSVAP due to port-related issues.
  • Infection-related port removal was needed in 1 aSVAP (7.7%) and 2 jSVAPs (10.5%) — no removals were required in fSVAPs.
  • Tip placement of the catheter (e.g., right atrium vs. vena cava) did not correlate with complications (P = .66).
  • Shorter surgical time likely with aSVAP/fSVAP as they use the same surgical field as the limb amputation.
  • Survival time median was similar across groups (jSVAP: 177 days, aSVAP: 125 days, fSVAP: 122 days).
  • SVAP implantation during limb amputation offers a practical and safe alternative to separate jugular placement.

Galliano

Veterinary Surgery

7

2022

Subcutaneous vascular access port implantation in the axillary or femoral/external iliac vein at the time of full limb amputation in dogs

2022-7-VS-galliano-2

Article Title: Subcutaneous vascular access port implantation in the axillary or femoral/external iliac vein at the time of full limb amputation in dogs

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

In Danielski 2025 et al., on PUO complication reduction, what was the **most common major complication** observed?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Site infections accounted for 4 of 5 major complications (5.3%) in the study.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Surgical site infection.
Site infections accounted for 4 of 5 major complications (5.3%) in the study.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Combined intramedullary (IM) pin and rhBMP-2 use resulted in a low complication rate (7.4%) after proximal ulnar osteotomy (PUO).
  • Major complications occurred in 5.3% of cases (4 infections, 1 pin breakage with ulnar tilt requiring revision).
  • Minor complications occurred in 2.1% of cases (seroma, delayed union).
  • No cases of non-union were observed; 98.9% of limbs achieved radiographic healing by 6 weeks.
  • IM pin breakage was noted in 11.8% of limbs but did not affect healing outcomes.
  • Chondrodystrophic breeds made up 64.8% of the cohort and tolerated the procedure well.
  • Compared to prior studies, complication rates were substantially reduced with this technique (prior major: 13.9%; this study: 5.3%).
  • The use of rhBMP-2 likely enhanced early bone healing and provided biologic support, particularly important in breeds at higher risk of complications.

Danielski

Veterinary Surgery

6

2025

Impact of intramedullary pinning and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein‐2 on postoperative complications after proximal ulnar osteotomy in dogs

2025-6-VS-danielski-1

Article Title: Impact of intramedullary pinning and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein‐2 on postoperative complications after proximal ulnar osteotomy in dogs

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

In Hanlon 2022 et al., on short screw sacroiliac fixation, how did screw positioning affect neurovascular safety?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. All short screws were located lateral to the spinal canal, avoiding this risk entirely.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Short screws terminated lateral to the spinal canal.
All short screws were located lateral to the spinal canal, avoiding this risk entirely.

🔍 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-3

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

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

In Matz 2022 et al., on stapler size comparison, what did the authors conclude about the clinical use of the evaluated staplers?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. All three tested stapler types produced acceptable ILP values, suggesting they are viable options for typhlectomy in similarly sized dogs.
Incorrect. The correct answer is All tested staplers are acceptable for similar dogs.
All three tested stapler types produced acceptable ILP values, suggesting they are viable options for typhlectomy in similarly sized dogs.

🔍 Key Findings

  • No significant difference in initial leak pressure (ILP) among TA 30 V3 2.5 mm, TA 60 3.5 mm, and TA 60 4.8 mm stapler sizes (P = .78).
  • All stapler types exceeded the physiological intraluminal pressure threshold (~25 mmHg), suggesting acceptable leak resistance.
  • Mean ILPs: TA 30 V3 (181.5 mmHg), TA 60 3.5 mm (112 mmHg), TA 60 4.8 mm (77.2 mmHg).
  • Leakage occurred at the staple line in 23 of 24 specimens; only one had ileal wall rupture.
  • No correlation found between ILP and cadaver weight, cecal wall thickness, or cecal length.
  • Cecal wall thickness averaged 4.9 mm, yet staple heights ranged only from 1.0–2.0 mm.
  • One specimen in each TA 60 group leaked near or below physiologic pressures, suggesting rare outliers.
  • Study supports clinical viability of all tested stapler sizes for canine typhlectomy, but highlights need for in vivo data on healing and complications.

Matz

Veterinary Surgery

4

2022

Ex vivo comparison of different thoracoabdominal stapler sizes for typhlectomy in canine cadavers

2022-4-VS-matz-5

Article Title: Ex vivo comparison of different thoracoabdominal stapler sizes for typhlectomy in canine cadavers

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

In Neal 2023 et al., on transcondylar screw placement, which variable significantly influenced screw trajectory deviation regardless of method used?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Residents had significantly more deviation (3.4° vs 2.5°) than diplomates, p = .0366.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Surgeon experience.
Residents had significantly more deviation (3.4° vs 2.5°) than diplomates, p = .0366.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Aiming device provided comparable trajectory accuracy to fluoroscopy, especially in right limbs (1.9° vs. 3.4°, p = .0128).
  • Eccentricity (deviation from condylar center) was lower with fluoroscopy (3.1 mm vs 4.2 mm, p = .0017), making fluoroscopy more precise.
  • Odds of joint infringement were 8× higher with the aiming device, though not statistically significant (p = .0575).
  • Residents had greater screw trajectory deviation than diplomates (p = .0366), highlighting impact of experience.
  • Aiming device procedures took less time than fluoroscopy in some scenarios, particularly for right limbs with right-handed surgeons.
  • Fluoroscopic procedures had more pin/drill attempts, increasing risk of glove puncture and potential aseptic breaks.
  • Mean deviation angles in both groups (<3.5°) were within acceptable range to avoid intracondylar fracture gap.
  • Cadaver model used large-breed, healthy adult dogs, not small-breed immature dogs, limiting generalizability.

Neal

Veterinary Surgery

4

2023

The effect of an aiming device on the accuracy of humeral transcondylar screw placement

2023-4-VS-neal-4

Article Title: The effect of an aiming device on the accuracy of humeral transcondylar screw placement

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

In Hertel 2025 et al., on portal venotomy for insulinoma, what was the dog's outcome one year postoperatively?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The dog remained euglycemic and stable despite CT-confirmed metastasis at 6 months.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Alive with metastatic disease and good quality of life.
The dog remained euglycemic and stable despite CT-confirmed metastasis at 6 months.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Portal venotomy enabled successful en bloc resection of a pancreatic insulinoma and associated thrombus in the portal vein, a novel approach in veterinary literature.
  • Temporary portal vein occlusion (15 min) was well tolerated, causing only transient small intestinal congestion without lasting hemodynamic compromise.
  • No intraoperative hemorrhage occurred following vascular isolation and venotomy repair with 5–0 polypropylene in a simple continuous pattern.
  • Postoperative complications were minimal, with only moderate pancreatitis managed medically and no portal hypertension observed on follow-up imaging.
  • Histopathology confirmed insulinoma, with no initial metastasis; CT at 6 months revealed hepatic and peritoneal metastases but no local recurrence at the venotomy site.
  • Portal vein luminal stenosis occurred post-repair but was clinically insignificant.
  • Advanced CT imaging and 3D printed modeling significantly enhanced surgical planning and anatomical assessment.
  • Surgical excision achieved good short-term outcomes, and the dog was alive and euglycemic one year later despite metastatic disease.

Hertel

Veterinary Surgery

5

2025

Successful venotomy for portal tumor thrombus removal due to pancreatic carcinoma in a dog

2025-5-VS-hertel-5

Article Title: Successful venotomy for portal tumor thrombus removal due to pancreatic carcinoma in a dog

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

In Cantatore 2022 et al., on transanal submucosal resection, what factor was most strongly associated with increased risk of tumor-related death?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Recurrence was the only variable significantly associated with tumor-related death (P = .046).
Incorrect. The correct answer is Recurrence of the tumor.
Recurrence was the only variable significantly associated with tumor-related death (P = .046).

🔍 Key Findings

  • Submucosal resection via a transanal approach was associated with a low rate (1.1%) of major complications and prolonged survival across benign and malignant rectal tumors.
  • Overall recurrence rate was 21.5%, with higher recurrence in malignant tumors: 28.6% (carcinomas) and 30.4% (carcinoma in situ) vs. 13.6% (adenomas).
  • Complications (P = .032) and incomplete margins (P = .023) were independently associated with increased recurrence risk.
  • Recurrence was the only factor associated with increased risk of tumor-related death (P = .046).
  • Repeat submucosal resection was successful in 60% of dogs with recurrence, indicating feasibility of this as a salvage approach.
  • 1-, 2-, and 5-year survival rates for carcinomas were 95%, 89%, and 73%, though overall survival was significantly longer for benign tumors (P = .001).
  • Preoperative diagnostics (FNA, biopsy) were often inconsistent with final histopathology – only 64.3% biopsy agreement.
  • Presurgical imaging was not consistently performed, limiting accurate staging in many dogs.

Cantatore

Veterinary Surgery

3

2022

Submucosal resection via a transanal approach for treatment of epithelial rectal tumors – a multicenter study

2022-3-VS-cantatore-1

Article Title: Submucosal resection via a transanal approach for treatment of epithelial rectal tumors – a multicenter study

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

Quiz Results

Previously Missed Questions
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.