Quiz Question

In Viitanen 2023 et al., on zygomatic sialoadenectomy, which dog conformation was associated with higher difficulty in complete gland removal using IOA?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. In brachycephalic cadavers, remnant gland tissue remained after IOA, likely due to anatomy.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Brachycephalic.
In brachycephalic cadavers, remnant gland tissue remained after IOA, likely due to anatomy.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Intraoral approach (IOA) reduced surgical time compared to lateral orbitotomy (median: 42.0 vs 65.7 minutes, p = .005)
  • Ease of closure (Stage III) was better with IOA (p < .001), though gland removal (Stage II) was easier with LOA (p = .039)
  • Complete gland removal was achieved in 8/10 IOA vs 10/10 LOA cases in cadaveric study
  • All 3 clinical cases had uneventful recoveries post-IOA, including one carcinoma, with no intra- or short-term postoperative complications
  • LOA had superior surgical exposure, but was more invasive and time-consuming
  • IOA posed greater difficulty in complete gland removal in brachycephalic dogs, with remnant tissue noted in 2/10 cadavers
  • IOA avoids osteotomy, reducing potential complications like delayed union and postoperative pain
  • Cosmetic outcomes and healing were better with IOA, and no E-collar was required postoperatively

Viitanen

Veterinary Surgery

2

2023

Intraoral approach for zygomatic sialoadenectomy in dogs: An anatomical study and three clinical cases

2023-2-VS-viitanen-4

Article Title: Intraoral approach for zygomatic sialoadenectomy in dogs: An anatomical study and three clinical cases

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 Jeon 2025 et al., on distal femoral shortening, which **advantage of DFSO over subtrochanteric osteotomy** is highlighted in dogs?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. DFSO avoids disrupting critical proximal structures needed for stem fixation.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Preservation of proximal femoral anatomy for stable fixation.
DFSO avoids disrupting critical proximal structures needed for stem fixation.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Distal femoral shortening osteotomy (DFSO) enabled prosthesis reduction in all 4 dogs with irreducible luxoid hips undergoing total hip replacement.
  • Median femoral shortening ratio was 13.8% (range: 10.7–15.3%) based on intraoperative tension needed for prosthesis reduction.
  • Bone union was achieved in all cases post-DFSO, indicating good healing potential.
  • Two major complications occurred: one prosthetic luxation and one aseptic stem loosening requiring explantation.
  • One intraoperative fracture of the greater trochanter occurred during trial reduction before DFSO.
  • DFSO did not result in neurovascular injury, even in cases with significant femoral head displacement (>4 cm).
  • Radiographic planning with FHD index and intraoperative assessment were crucial for determining DFSO necessity.
  • DFSO avoids complications linked to subtrochanteric osteotomy by preserving proximal femoral anatomy and allowing secure distal fixation.

Jeon

Veterinary Surgery

6

2025

Distal femoral shortening osteotomy for managing irreducible hips during total hip replacement in four dogs with severe luxoid hips

2025-6-VS-jeon-5

Article Title: Distal femoral shortening osteotomy for managing irreducible hips during total hip replacement in four dogs with severe luxoid hips

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 Moreira 2024 et al., on predictive equations for TPA correction, which technique demonstrated the **highest TLA shift** after cranial cortical alignment?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Frederick and Cross mCCWO showed significantly higher TLA shifts at high wedge angles.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Frederick and Cross.
Frederick and Cross mCCWO showed significantly higher TLA shifts at high wedge angles.

🔍 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-3

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 Canever 2022 et al., on labial flap vascular anatomy, which tissue layer was most critical to include to ensure arterial perfusion of the flap?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The musculomucosal layer housed the key vascular network needed for flap survival.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Musculomucosal layer including orbicularis oris.
The musculomucosal layer housed the key vascular network needed for flap survival.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Superior and inferior labial arteries in cats perfuse robust angiosomes, which support musculomucosal axial pattern flaps.
  • Cadaver angiography confirmed vascular anatomy, with consistent patterns between sides and among specimens.
  • The vascular supply is located primarily in the musculomucosal layer, not the skin, critical for flap viability.
  • Flap harvest requires inclusion of the orbicularis oris (± buccinator) muscle to ensure vascular integrity and flap survival.
  • Two clinical cases demonstrated successful use of superior and inferior labial musculomucosal flaps for palatal reconstruction with complete flap survival and resolution of clinical signs.
  • Intraoperative transillumination aided vessel localization, facilitating surgical planning and flap design.
  • No cases of distal flap necrosis or dehiscence occurred, although mild donor site morbidity (lip retraction, mucosal denuding) was noted.
  • These flaps offer a valuable option when local tissues are compromised, especially after failed previous repairs or radiation therapy.

Canever

Veterinary Surgery

4

2022

Evaluation of the superior and inferior labial musculomucosal flaps in cats: An angiographic study and case series

2022-4-VS-canever-3

Article Title: Evaluation of the superior and inferior labial musculomucosal flaps in cats: An angiographic 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 Ritson 2025 et al., on feline hilar lobectomy sealants, what was the **main advantage** of PLL and DS clips over traditional staplers in cadaveric models?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. PLL and DS clips required less space, making them advantageous for feline thoracic cavities.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Smaller working space requirements.
PLL and DS clips required less space, making them advantageous for feline thoracic cavities.

🔍 Key Findings

  • No leakage occurred using pretied ligature loops (PLL) or double-shank (DS) titanium clips up to 40 cm Hâ‚‚O airway pressure.
  • 1/10 stapled lobes leaked at supraphysiologic pressure (40 cm Hâ‚‚O), but this was not statistically significant (p = .33).
  • All techniques sealed effectively under physiologic and supraphysiologic pressures in cadaveric feline lungs.
  • PLL and DS clips required less working space than staplers, making them more practical for small thoracic cavities.
  • DS titanium clips offer enhanced security due to dual shanks and tissue-gripping design, reducing clip slippage.
  • Leak testing was cyclic and submerged, simulating physiologic ventilation and allowing robust evaluation.
  • Stapling failure occurred along the staple line, highlighting risks of air leakage due to staple misalignment or poor hilar access.
  • PLL and DS clips may be cost-effective and efficient alternatives for open or minimally invasive feline lung lobectomy.

Ritson

Veterinary Surgery

7

2025

Ex vivo comparative evaluation of feline hilar lung lobectomy using linear stapler, pretied ligature loop, and double-shank titanium clips

2025-7-VS-ritson-2

Article Title: Ex vivo comparative evaluation of feline hilar lung lobectomy using linear stapler, pretied ligature loop, and double-shank titanium clips

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, which liver lobe exhibited the greatest variability in the number of veins draining into the left hepatic vein?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The left lateral lobe showed 2–8 draining veins into the LHV, the widest range observed.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Left lateral lobe.
The left lateral lobe showed 2–8 draining veins into the LHV, the widest range observed.

🔍 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-3

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 Latifi 2024 et al., on fascial mapping in the canine hindlimb, which region consistently lacked a usable fascial plane for wide tumor excision?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The femoral triangle had thin fascia, precluding reliable use as a fascial plane.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Femoral triangle.
The femoral triangle had thin fascia, precluding reliable use as a fascial plane.

🔍 Key Findings

  • This anatomical study mapped fascial planes of the canine hindlimb and pelvis to aid superficial tumor resection.
  • Type I fascia (discrete sheets) was suitable for deep margins in fascia lata, lateral crus, and gluteal regions.
  • Areas with poor or absent fascia included the ischiorectal fossa, femoral triangle, stifle extensor mechanism, and pes.
  • Type IV fascia associated with periosteum (e.g., patella, tibial tuberosity) required partial ostectomy for inclusion in surgical margins.
  • Nerves at risk during deep dissection included obturator, superficial peroneal, and tibial nerves, particularly in regions with weak fascia.
  • In males, bulbospongiosus muscle could act as a fascial plane but dissection was challenging and potentially hemorrhagic.
  • In females, constrictor vulvae/vestibulae muscles were tightly associated with mucosa, limiting clean resection options.
  • Distal hindlimb resections often lacked a usable fascial plane, suggesting that amputation or adjuvant therapy may be more appropriate.

Latifi

Veterinary Surgery

3

2024

Fascial plane mapping for superficial tumor resection in dogs: Part III – Hindlimb and pelvis

2024-3-VS-latifi-1

Article Title: Fascial plane mapping for superficial tumor resection in dogs: Part III – Hindlimb and pelvis

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 Dalton 2023 et al., In Minimally invasive acetabular fracture repair in dogs, which intraoperative complication was observed in cadaveric specimens?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. One cadaver had mild sciatic nerve indentation; others had no gross nerve injury.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Sciatic nerve indentation.
One cadaver had mild sciatic nerve indentation; others had no gross nerve injury.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Feasibility study in 5 canine cadavers plus 1 clinical case (Chihuahua, 5.5 kg).
  • Technique used two small approaches (caudal and craniolateral) connected with an epiperiosteal tunnel.
  • Plates were precontoured on mirrored 3D-printed hemipelves to improve fit and reduce intraoperative bending.
  • Cadaver outcomes: fracture gap <2 mm, step defect <1 mm, pelvic angulation <5°.
  • Sciatic nerve injury was minimal: 1/5 cadavers had a mild indentation; others had no gross injury.
  • Median total surgical time: ~46 minutes in cadavers; incisions ~5 cm.
  • Clinical Chihuahua case: weight-bearing within 24 hrs, radiographic union at 3 months; one screw fractured but no adverse effect.
  • Authors conclude: MIAF with 3D printing is feasible and accurate, but requires further evaluation before routine use.

Dalton

Veterinary Surgery

7

2023

Minimally invasive repair of acetabular fractures in dogs: Ex vivo feasibility study and case report

2023-7-VS-dalton-3

Article Title: Minimally invasive repair of acetabular fractures in dogs: Ex vivo feasibility study and case report

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 Grimes 2022 et al., on PDA rupture risks, what best describes the utility of the Jackson-Henderson technique?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Jackson-Henderson eliminates medial dissection, which is beneficial after rupture.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Used to avoid dissecting medial to PDA in rupture cases.
Jackson-Henderson eliminates medial dissection, which is beneficial after rupture.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Rupture occurred in 7.0% of dogs undergoing surgical PDA ligation (20/285).
  • Overall mortality was low (0.4%), with only one death occurring post-rupture.
  • Residual flow occurred in 9.4% of dogs; significantly more common in dogs with rupture.
  • Residual flow odds were not increased when ligation was successfully performed despite rupture.
  • No significant associations between rupture and age, weight, suture size, or dissection technique.
  • Jackson-Henderson and intrapericardial techniques were helpful in managing rupture or fibrosis.
  • Major complications (non-rupture) were rare (1.4%), including pulmonary artery ligation and cardiac arrest.
  • Surgeon preparedness (e.g., hemostatic tools, alternate techniques) was key to successful outcomes.

Grimes

Veterinary Surgery

4

2022

Surgical ligation of patent ductus arteriosus in dogs: Incidence and risk factors for rupture

2022-4-VS-grimes-4

Article Title: Surgical ligation of patent ductus arteriosus in dogs: Incidence and risk factors for 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 Espinel Rupérez 2023 et al., in Arthroscopic-assisted hip toggle stabilization in cats, what proportion of deviations from the intended technique were major?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Major deviations occurred in 8/13 cases, all related to femoral tunnel placement accuracy.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 8 out of 13.
Major deviations occurred in 8/13 cases, all related to femoral tunnel placement accuracy.

🔍 Key Findings

  • 14 joints from 7 cat cadavers underwent AA-HTS successfully.
  • Median surgical time: 46.5 min (29–144), including 7 min for arthroscopy and 40 min for toggle placement.
  • Intraoperative complications in 5/14 joints: 4 related to femoral tunnel creation, 1 toggle lodging.
  • Toggle passage through femoral tunnel was the most challenging step, mildly difficult in 6 joints.
  • Cartilage injury occurred in 10 joints, but all were minor (<10% of cartilage area).
  • 13 deviations from planned technique were identified (8 major, 5 minor), all involving femoral tunnel placement.
  • No neurovascular, intrapelvic, or major periarticular injuries occurred.
  • Authors conclude: AA-HTS is feasible in cats, but associated with high rates of minor iatrogenic cartilage damage, intra-op complications, and technique deviations.

Espinel Rupérez

Veterinary Surgery

7

2023

Arthroscopic-assisted hip toggle stabilization in cats: An ex vivo feasibility study

2023-7-VS-espinel-4

Article Title: Arthroscopic-assisted hip toggle stabilization in cats: An ex vivo feasibility 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: Anatomy & Surgical Approach
70%

You answered 7 out of 10 questions correctly

Question 1:

❌ Incorrect. You answered: Answer

Correct answer:

Rationale

Question 1:

âś… 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.