Quiz Question

In Hanlon 2022 et al., on short screw sacroiliac fixation, what was the difference in mechanical performance between short lag and short positional screws?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. No statistical difference in mechanical performance (stiffness, peak, or yield load) was found between SLS and SPS.
Incorrect. The correct answer is No mechanical difference was observed.
No statistical difference in mechanical performance (stiffness, peak, or yield load) was found between SLS and SPS.

🔍 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-2

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

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., on acetabular fracture repair, what was a key advantage of using locking screws in the plate application?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Locking screws provided fixed-angle stability and helped maintain reduction, especially across the broad plate span.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Enhanced reduction through fixed-angle stability.
Locking screws provided fixed-angle stability and helped maintain reduction, especially across the broad plate span.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Minimally invasive repair of acetabular fractures using precontoured plates on 3D-printed models is feasible and technically reproducible in dogs.
  • All cadavers had fracture gaps <2 mm and step defects <1 mm, indicating accurate reduction.
  • Sciatic nerve injury was minimal or absent in all cases, supporting potential neuroprotection from indirect approaches.
  • Pelvic angulation was maintained <5°, confirming preservation of alignment post-reduction.
  • Surgical time averaged ~46 minutes in cadavers for both approaches and repair.
  • Clinical case showed good radiographic healing by 8 weeks and full union by 3 months, with early weight-bearing post-op.
  • Use of locking screws improved reduction fidelity, particularly across a broad plate span.
  • 3D printing accelerated surgical planning, though its necessity remains debated due to the availability and cost concerns.

Dalton

Veterinary Surgery

6

2023

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

2023-6-VS-dalton-5

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 Muroi 2025 et al., on refracture risk, all refractures in the **plate removal group** occurred at which location?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Refractures after plate removal occurred at the same site as the original fracture, linked to decreased BMD and thickness.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Same site as initial fracture.
Refractures after plate removal occurred at the same site as the original fracture, linked to decreased BMD and thickness.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Refracture occurred in 5.5% of limbs, with higher incidence in the plate removal group (12.5%) vs. non-removal (3.5%).
  • In the non-plate removal group, refractures occurred at the most distal screw site, linked to greater screw position change during growth (OR 1.79, p=0.04).
  • Screw-to-bone diameter ratio (SBDR) >0.4 was a significant risk factor for refracture in the plate retention group.
  • In the plate removal group, refractures occurred at the original fracture site, associated with lower pixel value ratio (bone mineral density) and reduced radial thickness.
  • Implant-induced osteoporosis (IIO) beneath the plate likely contributed to refracture risk after plate removal.
  • Younger age at fracture (<6 months) was associated with higher refracture risk due to ongoing radial growth and shifting screw position.
  • No significant association was found between refracture and plate type (locking vs conventional), fixation method, or ulnar union.
  • Recommendations include careful SBDR sizing, motion restriction, and cautious plate removal decisions in growing dogs.

Muroi

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

2

2025

A Retrospective Study of Risk Factors Associated with Refracture after Repair of Radial–Ulnar Fractures in Small-Breed Dogs

2025-2-VCOT-muroi-3

Article Title: A Retrospective Study of Risk Factors Associated with Refracture after Repair of Radial–Ulnar Fractures in Small-Breed Dogs

Journal: Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

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 Sadowitz 2023 et al., on screw angle & speed, which group served as the control group with 0% TCF rate?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Group A served as the control and had zero TCFs, highlighting the safety of coaxial low-speed screw insertion.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Group A (0° at 650 rpm).
Group A served as the control and had zero TCFs, highlighting the safety of coaxial low-speed screw insertion.

🔍 Key Findings

  • TCF risk increased significantly with 10° insertion angle at both 650 rpm (12.5%) and 1350 rpm (17.5%), compared to 0% in the control group (0° at 650 rpm).
  • Hand insertion at 10° angle resulted in only 3.75% TCF rate, suggesting lower insertion speed reduces risk.
  • No TCFs occurred when screws were inserted coaxially (0°) at either 650 or 1350 rpm, indicating angle is a critical factor.
  • Screw speed alone did not increase TCF risk unless combined with off-axis insertion.
  • Radiographically detectable TCFs were only considered; actual rates may be higher with direct bone inspection.
  • Cutting flutes engaging undrilled bone during off-axis insertion likely contribute to TCF formation.
  • Clinical implication: Ensure screws are inserted coaxially and at lower speeds to reduce TCF risk during procedures like TPLO.
  • Statistically significant differences were found between control and high-angle insertion groups: Group C (p = .001), Group E (p < .001).

Sadowitz

Veterinary Surgery

8

2023

Effect of screw insertion angle and speed on the incidence of transcortical fracture development in a canine tibial diaphyseal model

2023-8-VS-sadowitz-2

Article Title: Effect of screw insertion angle and speed on the incidence of transcortical fracture development in a canine tibial diaphyseal model

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 McLean 2024 et al., which variables were found to have no significant association with rock-back?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Neither plate inclination nor ECA were associated with rock-back in this clinical study (p = 0.4 and 0.2):contentReference[oaicite:1]{index=1}
Incorrect. The correct answer is Plate inclination and exit cut angle (ECA).
Neither plate inclination nor ECA were associated with rock-back in this clinical study (p = 0.4 and 0.2):contentReference[oaicite:1]{index=1}

🔍 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-2

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

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 Kang 2024 et al., on sacroiliac fixation strength, which implant required significantly longer placement time?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Mean placement time for HCS was 712 sec vs 379 sec for CS group (p<0.001)
Incorrect. The correct answer is 2.3-mm headless cannulated screws.
Mean placement time for HCS was 712 sec vs 379 sec for CS group (p<0.001)

🔍 Key Findings Summary

  • 20 cats with pelvic fractures treated using locking plates with only cortical screws
  • 28 fractures stabilized (ilium: 17, acetabulum: 6, ischium: 3, pubis: 2)
  • Implants: Primarily 1.5/2.0 mm LCPs or String-of-Pearls plates
  • Major complications in 2/20 cases (10%): sciatic entrapment, malunion requiring THA
  • Minor complications in 2/20 cases (10%): plate impingement, transient lameness
  • Clinical union in all cats by 8 weeks; all cats returned to full function
  • Authors conclude cortical screws alone can provide adequate fixation in feline pelvic fractures if screw purchase and bone quality are sufficient

Kang

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopedics and Traumatology

1

2024

Biomechanical Comparison of Double 2.3-mm Headless Cannulated Self-Compression Screws and Single 3.5-mm Cortical Screw in Lag Fashion in a Canine Sacroiliac Luxation Model

2024-1-VCOT-kang-5

Article Title: Biomechanical Comparison of Double 2.3-mm Headless Cannulated Self-Compression Screws and Single 3.5-mm Cortical Screw in Lag Fashion in a Canine Sacroiliac Luxation Model

Journal: Veterinary and Comparative Orthopedics and Traumatology

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 Butare-Smith 2022 et al., on cerclage knot biomechanics, which knot type demonstrated the highest resistance to cyclic loading before loosening?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Double-loop cerclage resisted up to 500,000 cycles at high loads, outperforming other configurations.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Double-loop cerclage.
Double-loop cerclage resisted up to 500,000 cycles at high loads, outperforming other configurations.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Double-loop cerclage resisted the highest peak load (805 N) and maintained tension longer than twist (488 N) and single-loop (397 N) configurations.
  • Double-loop cerclage sustained 500,000 cycles at 60–80% of peak load in some cases without loosening, outperforming other types.
  • Twist knots loosened rapidly, often within 10 cycles even at low loads (100–390 N).
  • Single-loop knots performed better than twist, with partial resistance up to 100,000 cycles at 160 N, but showed wide variability.
  • All loosening occurred before wire breakage, indicating clinical failure would happen from slack, not fracture.
  • Double-loop cerclage had highest initial tension (323 N) compared to single-loop (124 N) and twist (69 N).
  • Fatigue limit was not identified for twist, since they all loosened early at even 20% of peak load.
  • Clinical recommendation: double-loop cerclage is best for resisting repeated subfailure loading, ideal for fissure prevention or fragment stabilization.

Butare-Smith

Veterinary Surgery

2

2022

Double-loop cerclage resists greater loads for more cycles than twist and single-loop cerclage

2022-2-VS-butare-smith-1

Article Title: Double-loop cerclage resists greater loads for more cycles than twist and single-loop cerclage

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 Mullen 2023 et al., on microvascular perfusion, why was the green TA (4.8 mm) cartridge selected for stapled enterectomies?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The green TA cartridge matched canine small intestinal thickness (approx. 2.5 mm), supporting its appropriate use.
Incorrect. The correct answer is It matches canine intestinal thickness more closely.
The green TA cartridge matched canine small intestinal thickness (approx. 2.5 mm), supporting its appropriate use.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Microvascular density at the site of foreign body obstruction was significantly lower in obstructed dogs compared to healthy controls.
  • PBR (perfused boundary region) was paradoxically lower in obstructed dogs, indicating that PBR may not reliably correlate with tissue viability in this context.
  • No significant difference in microvascular perfusion between subjectively viable vs nonviable intestines, suggesting subjective assessment is unreliable.
  • No difference in perfusion parameters between handsewn and stapled enterectomies, indicating both techniques preserve vascular health equally.
  • Stapled enterectomy using green TA staples is safe and did not impair intestinal perfusion at the anastomosis site.
  • SDF videomicroscopy is feasible intraoperatively and can differentiate healthy from diseased intestine in dogs.
  • Surgeons' subjective evaluations led to potentially unnecessary enterectomies, as microvascular parameters did not differ.
  • No cases of dehiscence or mortality, suggesting both surgical approaches are effective when applied properly.

Mullen

Veterinary Surgery

4

2023

A quantitative evaluation of the effect of foreign body obstruction and enterectomy technique on canine small intestinal microvascular health

2023-4-VS-mullen-5

Article Title: A quantitative evaluation of the effect of foreign body obstruction and enterectomy technique on canine small intestinal microvascular health

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 Marturello 2023 et al., on 3D-printed humeral models, which anatomical region had the **highest model accuracy** across all printer types?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Humeral condyle replicas were consistently within 0.5 mm of cadaveric measurements, the most accurate across the study.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Humeral condyle.
Humeral condyle replicas were consistently within 0.5 mm of cadaveric measurements, the most accurate across the study.

🔍 Key Findings

  • 3D-printed models using desktop printers (FDM, LFS) showed submillimetric accuracy, comparable to or better than industrial-grade PJP printers.
  • Bone size had a greater effect on print accuracy than printer type, especially in proximal humerus regions.
  • The humeral condyle region showed the greatest model accuracy, with mean differences under 0.5 mm, regardless of printer.
  • Models tended to be slightly smaller than cadaveric bones, potentially due to systematic underestimation during printing.
  • FDM printer provided the highest accuracy at the humeral condyle in medium-sized bones (+0.09 mm).
  • LFS printer produced prints faster and more reliably than FDM, although both had comparable dimensional accuracy.
  • Statistically significant differences existed, but all were submillimetric and unlikely to impact surgical outcomes.
  • Desktop printers are suitable for surgical planning, including plate pre-contouring and patient-specific instrumentation.

Marturello

Veterinary Surgery

1

2023

Accuracy of anatomic 3‐dimensionally printed canine humeral models

2023-1-VS-marturello-2

Article Title: Accuracy of anatomic 3‐dimensionally printed canine humeral models

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 Eskelinen 2025 et al., on Plate–Pin fixation for MPL, what was the most common cause of minor complications?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Pin-related issues (migration, bending, breakage) accounted for most minor complications.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Pin migration or breakage.
Pin-related issues (migration, bending, breakage) accounted for most minor complications.

🔍 Key Findings

  • Plate–Pin TTT fixation resolved MPL in 64/65 stifles with low recurrence (1.5%) and good lameness outcomes postoperatively.
  • Complication rate was 21.5% (14/65 stifles), mostly minor (57%); major issues included pin migration, fracture, or capsular failure.
  • Pin-related issues accounted for 8 of 20 total complications, highlighting implant refinement is needed.
  • No avulsions, TT fixation failures, or luxation recurrence occurred in cases where surgical technique was followed precisely.
  • Surgical deviations increased complication risk 11.3× (p < 0.05), suggesting adherence to protocol is critical.
  • Single-session bilateral MPL surgery had comparable complication rate (3/20) to unilateral surgery (11/45).
  • Screw breakage occurred in 3 cases, suggesting at least 3 screws may be needed for secure TT fixation.
  • Authors suggest temporary pin fixation and later removal may reduce complications, though prospective studies are needed.

Eskelinen

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

4

2025

Outcome and Complications Following Medial Patellar Luxation Corrective Surgery with Tibial Tuberosity Transposition Using a Locking Plate and a Pin Fixation: 45 Unilateral and 20 Single-Session Bilateral Procedures

2025-4-VCOT-eskelinen-3

Article Title: Outcome and Complications Following Medial Patellar Luxation Corrective Surgery with Tibial Tuberosity Transposition Using a Locking Plate and a Pin Fixation: 45 Unilateral and 20 Single-Session Bilateral Procedures

Journal: Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

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: Implant Selection & Configuration
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.