Quiz Question

In Miller 2024 et al., on intestinal obstruction and catheter technique in cats, what was the overall success rate of the red rubber catheter technique (RRCT) for removing linear foreign bodies?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The RRCT successfully removed LFBOs in 20 out of 24 cases, representing 83% success.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 83%.
The RRCT successfully removed LFBOs in 20 out of 24 cases, representing 83% success.

🔍 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-1

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 Thibault 2023 et al., on DPO for THR luxation, which factor was most associated with poor outcomes after DPO for THR luxation?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Luxoid hips were disproportionately represented among dogs that reluxated or failed after DPO, likely due to soft tissue instability.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Luxoid hips prior to THR.
Luxoid hips were disproportionately represented among dogs that reluxated or failed after DPO, likely due to soft tissue instability.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Double pelvic osteotomy (DPO) reduced angle of lateral opening (ALO) by a median of 11° (p ≤ .001).
  • Despite ALO correction, THR reluxation occurred in 5/11 dogs, often within 7 days post-DPO.
  • Post-DPO ALO remained elevated (median 56°), with only 2 dogs achieving the recommended 35–45° range.
  • Explantation was required in 7/11 dogs (5 aseptic loosenings, 2 infections), suggesting poor long-term implant survival.
  • Dogs with luxoid hips were more likely to fail, even with corrected ALO, emphasizing soft tissue instability as a risk factor.
  • Compared to TPO (23° correction), DPO yielded a smaller ALO correction, possibly due to older dog population and less elastic pelvis.
  • No ventral luxation occurred post-DPO, unlike in TPO studies, likely due to more conservative ALO reduction.
  • Authors do not recommend routine DPO for THR luxation due to high complication and failure rates.

Thibault

Veterinary Surgery

8

2023

Poor success rates with double pelvic osteotomy for craniodorsal luxation of total hip prosthesis in 11 dogs

2023-8-VS-thibault-4

Article Title: Poor success rates with double pelvic osteotomy for craniodorsal luxation of total hip prosthesis in 11 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 Low 2025 et al., on gonadectomy and CrCLD, which subgroup comparison showed no significant increase in CrCLD risk?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Subgroup analysis showed no significant increase in CrCLD odds in dogs neutered after 1 year of age compared to intact dogs.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Dogs gonadectomized >1 year vs entire dogs.
Subgroup analysis showed no significant increase in CrCLD odds in dogs neutered after 1 year of age compared to intact dogs.

🔍 Key Findings

Increased risk with gonadectomy:

  • Pooled OR for CrCLD:
    • Females: 2.29 (95% CI: 1.77–2.95)
    • Males: 2.12 (95% CI: 1.67–2.69)

Early gonadectomy (≤1 year) further increased risk:

  • OR vs >1 year:
    • Females: 3.39
    • Males: 3.13

Late gonadectomy (>1 year) had no significant difference vs intact dogs.

Breed-specific findings:

  • Female Labradors: No increased CrCLD risk from gonadectomy (OR = 1.19; 95% CI: 0.54–2.64)
  • Male Labradors: Increased risk persisted (OR = 2.13; 95% CI: 1.53–2.98)

Study type: Systematic review + meta-analysis of 24 observational studies (n = 1.85 million dogs)

Low

Veterinary Surgery

2

2025

The association between gonadectomy and timing of gonadectomy, and the risk of canine cranial cruciate ligament disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2025-2-VS-low-5

Article Title: The association between gonadectomy and timing of gonadectomy, and the risk of canine cranial cruciate ligament disease: A systematic review and meta-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 Cola 2024 et al., on laparotomy-assisted endoscopy, what was the primary factor associated with the need to convert to enterotomy?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Intestinal wall damage was significantly associated with surgical conversion (p = .043).
Incorrect. The correct answer is Intestinal wall damage.
Intestinal wall damage was significantly associated with surgical conversion (p = .043).

🔍 Key Findings

  • LAER was effective (partial or complete) in 35/40 cases, regardless of FB location or type.
  • Intestinal wall damage significantly increased the likelihood of conversion to enterotomy (p = .043).
  • LAER led to significantly shorter hospitalization (median 48 h vs 72 h; p = .006).
  • Patients in the LAER group required less postoperative analgesia (median 36 h vs 48 h; p < .001).
  • Faster return to spontaneous feeding was seen in LAER group (median 24 h vs 36 h; p = .012).
  • No significant difference in complication rate or postoperative ileus between LAER and enterotomy groups.
  • Sharp, linear, or multiple FBs did not significantly affect LAER effectiveness.
  • Conversion to surgery was required in 5/40 LAER attempts, mostly due to immovable FBs or intestinal damage.

Cola

Veterinary Surgery

7

2024

Laparotomy‐assisted endoscopic removal of gastrointestinal foreign bodies: Evaluation of this technique and postoperative recovery in dogs and cats

2024-7-VS-cola-1

Article Title: Laparotomy‐assisted endoscopic removal of gastrointestinal foreign bodies: Evaluation of this technique and postoperative recovery 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 Marti 2024 et al., on surgical outcomes in feline sialoceles, what conclusion was drawn about marsupialization alone as a treatment?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. No recurrence was reported in cats treated with marsupialization alone, although long-term follow-up was limited.
Incorrect. The correct answer is May be a viable first-line approach.
No recurrence was reported in cats treated with marsupialization alone, although long-term follow-up was limited.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Mandibular and sublingual glands were the most commonly involved salivary glands in feline sialoceles.
  • Left-sided lesions were more prevalent (71%) among affected cats.
  • Ranulae were present in over half (57%) of cases, highlighting the importance of thorough oral exams.
  • Surgical approaches included lateral, ventral, intraoral, or combinations thereof, with no recurrences reported.
  • Marsupialization alone (without gland removal) resolved clinical signs in 4/21 cats, with no short-term recurrence noted.
  • Complications occurred in 5/21 cats (24%), including incisional swelling and one case of feline oral pain syndrome.
  • One cat experienced iatrogenic injury from misidentification of the mandibular lymph node as the gland.
  • Median follow-up time beyond 30 days was 822 days (range: 90–1205), with no long-term recurrences or contralateral lesions observed.

Marti

Veterinary Surgery

7

2024

Outcomes of surgically treated sialoceles in 21 cats: A multi‐institutional retrospective study (2010–2021)

2024-7-VS-marti-5

Article Title: Outcomes of surgically treated sialoceles in 21 cats: A multi‐institutional retrospective study (2010–2021)

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 Song 2024 et al., on CT vs cystoscopy for ectopic ureters in dogs, what proportion of dogs were misclassified for CLA candidacy based on CT findings alone?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. 26% of cases were misclassified for CLA based on CT, underlining its limitations for treatment planning.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 26%.
26% of cases were misclassified for CLA based on CT, underlining its limitations for treatment planning.

🔍 Key Findings

  • CT correctly identified ectopic ureters in 91% of dogs, but missed 50% of normal ureters, limiting its negative predictive value.
  • Sensitivity for intramural ectopic ureters was 65%, while specificity was 71%, indicating moderate diagnostic performance.
  • Sensitivity for extramural ectopic ureters was only 29%, despite a high specificity of 97%.
  • CT was inaccurate in predicting ureteral orifice location, with sensitivity ranging from 0% to 76% depending on the site.
  • 26% of dogs were misclassified for cystoscopic laser ablation (CLA) eligibility based on CT findings alone.
  • Overall CT accuracy for CLA candidacy was 74%, but a significant minority would have been inappropriately treated.
  • Multivariate analysis found no predictive factors (e.g., colon distension, body weight) for when CT would be incorrect.
  • Authors recommend confirmatory cystoscopy to verify CT findings prior to treatment planning.

Song

Veterinary Surgery

3

2024

Receiver operating characteristics of computed tomography (CT) compared to cystoscopy in diagnosis of canine ectopic ureters: Thirty-five cases

2024-3-VS-song-4

Article Title: Receiver operating characteristics of computed tomography (CT) compared to cystoscopy in diagnosis of canine ectopic ureters: Thirty-five 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 Healy 2025 et al., on incidental PBBs, what recommendation is made regarding prophylactic lung resection?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. With no SP observed, authors do not recommend prophylactic lung removal for incidental PBBs.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Not justified based on study data.
With no SP observed, authors do not recommend prophylactic lung removal for incidental PBBs.

🔍 Key Findings

Population: 2,178 canine CTs reviewed retrospectively.
Prevalence: Incidental PBBs found in 1.37% (30/2178).
Outcome: None of the dogs with incidental PBBs developed clinical spontaneous pneumothorax (SP) over a median follow-up of 1255 days.
Significant Associations:

  • Age: Dogs with PBBs were significantly older (median 10.5 yrs vs. 8.2 yrs, p = .001).
  • CT indication: PBBs more likely during neoplastic staging (p = .006).

PBB Characteristics:

  • Total = 60 PBBs (median 1/dog; range 1–7).
  • Location: 35% in left caudal, 31.6% right caudal, only 13.3% in right cranial lobe.
  • Size-based: 25 bullae (>10 mm), 35 blebs (≤10 mm).

Conclusion: Prophylactic resection of incidental PBBs not justified given no observed SP risk in this population.

Healy

Veterinary Surgery

1

2025

Significance of incidentally identified bullae and blebs on thoracic computed tomography and prevalence of subsequent pneumothorax in dogs

2025-1-VS-healy-3

Article Title: Significance of incidentally identified bullae and blebs on thoracic computed tomography and prevalence of subsequent pneumothorax 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 Loh 2024 et al., on treatment outcomes for CvHL in dogs, which nonsurgical method had the highest success rate?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Hobbles achieved a 61.8% success rate, the highest among nonsurgical treatments.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Hobbles.
Hobbles achieved a 61.8% success rate, the highest among nonsurgical treatments.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Low-trauma events caused 82.9% of CvHL cases; Poodles and poodle-crosses represented 49.4% of cases.
  • Success rate of hobbles (61.8%) was significantly higher than closed reduction alone (10.3%) or Ehmer sling (18.5%).
  • Multivariate analysis found hobbles 7.62x more likely to succeed vs. closed reduction (p = .001).
  • Specialist surgeons had higher success with nonsurgical management (OR: 2.68; p = .047).
  • Older age associated with better outcomes (OR: 1.15 per year; p < .0005).
  • Ehmer sling is not recommended due to high failure and complication rates (60.6%).
  • Toggle rod stabilization had a high surgical success rate (88.2%) with low complication.
  • No link was found between CvHL and hip dysplasia or OA in most cases (only 2/108 showed OA).

Loh

Veterinary Surgery

4

2024

Caudoventral hip luxation in 160 dogs (2003–2023): A multicenter retrospective case series

2024-4-VS-loh-1

Article Title: Caudoventral hip luxation in 160 dogs (2003–2023): A multicenter retrospective 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 Davies 2024 et al., on lymphaticovenous anastomosis, what is the proposed advantage of creating a TD to AV anastomosis over traditional TD ligation and cisterna chyli ablation?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. TD to AV connection reduces stimulus for collateral formation and may prevent leakage.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Direct lymphatic drainage to central veins.
TD to AV connection reduces stimulus for collateral formation and may prevent leakage.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Lymphaticovenous anastomosis (TD to AV) was successfully performed in all 8 feline cadavers using a microvascular anastomotic coupler (MAC).
  • Anastomotic patency was confirmed intraoperatively and postoperatively in 7/8 cats via contrast lymphography or retrograde venography.
  • Dissection and anastomosis took a median of 120 minutes, with minimal technical complications.
  • A 1.5 mm MAC was used in 6 cats, and a 2.0 mm in 2 cats; TD diameter ranged 1.0–1.5 mm, AV up to 2.25 mm.
  • Challenges included vessel twisting and luminal patency issues, resolved intraoperatively with minor adjustments (e.g., repeat pinning, tacking suture).
  • MAC use eliminated need for hand-suturing, lowering skill demands but requiring precise alignment.
  • Technique provides direct lymphatic-to-venous drainage, potentially reducing the stimulus for collateral vessel formation.
  • May serve as a future treatment option for feline idiopathic chylothorax, warranting further in vivo studies.

Davies

Veterinary Surgery

7

2024

Lymphaticovenous anastomosis of the caudal thoracic duct to the azygous vein: A feline cadaver study

2024-7-VS-davies-5

Article Title: Lymphaticovenous anastomosis of the caudal thoracic duct to the azygous vein: A feline cadaver 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 Korchek 2025 et al., on fracture gap risk, how did absence of external coaptation affect implant failure risk?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Absence of external coaptation was significantly associated with implant failure (OR = 10.1, p = .04).
Incorrect. The correct answer is It increased the risk of implant failure.
Absence of external coaptation was significantly associated with implant failure (OR = 10.1, p = .04).

🔍 Key Findings

80 toy breed dogs with surgically repaired transverse radius/ulna fractures were analyzed.
Fracture gap in the caudal cortex was present in 46% of cases.
Implant failure rate:

  • 27% in cases with fracture gap
  • 2% in cases without fracture gap

Fracture gap significantly associated with implant failure:

  • OR = 23.0, 95% CI: 2.7–197.9, p = 0.004

Absence of external coaptation also associated with increased implant failure risk:

  • OR = 10.1, 95% CI: 1.1–89.6, p = 0.04

Prolonged external coaptation (>1 week) linked to non-implant complications (skin wounds, osteopenia, osteomyelitis):

  • OR = 5.4, p = 0.04

Plate thickness, type, open screw holes, and working length were not statistically significant predictors of implant failure after multivariable analysis.

Korchek

Veterinary Surgery

2

2025

Association of fracture gap with implant failure in radius and ulna fractures in toy breed dogs—A multicenter retrospective cohort study

2025-2-VS-korchek-4

Article Title: Association of fracture gap with implant failure in radius and ulna fractures in toy breed dogs—A multicenter retrospective cohort 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: Conservative vs Surgical
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.