Quiz Question

In Kwok 2023 et al., on BFX lateral bolt THR in dogs, which type of complication most often led to prosthesis explantation?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. 4 of 5 explants were due to acetabular cup issues, not femoral stem failure.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Acetabular cup complications.
4 of 5 explants were due to acetabular cup issues, not femoral stem failure.

šŸ” Key Findings

  • 97.4% of dogs returned to normal function after total hip replacement using the BFX lateral bolt.
  • Mean femoral stem subsidence was 1.22 mm, with most occurring in the first month and minimal thereafter.
  • Postoperative complication rate was 13.6%, with 9.2% major and 4.4% minor complications.
  • Femoral fractures (3.6%) and coxofemoral luxations (3.6%) were the most common major complications.
  • Increased age and higher stem size were risk factors for postoperative femoral fractures; CFI >2.0 was also associated.
  • Medial calcar fractures were avoided, and fractures occurred distal to stem ingrowth zone, simplifying repairs.
  • Three cases underwent prophylactic plating, all with excellent outcomes and no complications.
  • Explant rate was 2.6% (5/195), with most failures involving acetabular cup rather than femoral stem.

Kwok

Veterinary Surgery

1

2023

Clinical outcomes of canine total hip replacement utilizing a BFX lateral bolt femoral stem: 195 consecutive cases (2013–2019)

2023-1-VS-kwok-5

Article Title: Clinical outcomes of canine total hip replacement utilizing a BFX lateral bolt femoral stem: 195 consecutive cases (2013–2019)

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

šŸ”„100% would expect this on the real thing

šŸ¤”Useful, but not core exam material

šŸ—‘ļøNot relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
ā€
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
ā€
Mind trying that again?

In Lomas 2025 et al., on hybrid THR in cats, which component combination was used in all cases?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. All cats received a CFX cemented femoral stem and a 12 mm BFX cementless acetabular cup.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Cemented femoral stem and cementless acetabular cup.
All cats received a CFX cemented femoral stem and a 12 mm BFX cementless acetabular cup.

šŸ” Key Findings

  • Hybrid THR in cats showed no major complications across 17 hips in 15 cats, including 2 bilateral cases.
  • Postoperative radiographs confirmed stable implant positioning with no loosening, migration, or dislocation in follow-up imaging.
  • Mean owner satisfaction was high, with a mean short-form feline musculoskeletal pain index (sf-FMPI) score of 2/36 at a mean follow-up of 438 days.
  • SCFE (slipped capital femoral epiphysis) was the most common indication, seen in 13/17 hips.
  • Partial tenotomy of rectus femoris origin resolved intraoperative medial patella luxation in 3 cases—no cats required surgical correction later.
  • A micro BFX cup allowed for increased acetabular offset, possibly reducing luxation risk even when using a +0 femoral head offset.
  • Hybrid THR was successfully used as a revision for failed CFX THR due to recurrent luxation—implants remained stable post-revision.
  • Use of oversized cups (12 mm) with shallow seating or medial breach still resulted in stable outcomes, suggesting good implant fixation even with reduced bone stock.

Lomas

Veterinary Surgery

6

2025

Medium‐term outcomes of hybrid total hip arthroplasty in cats: Cemented femoral stem and cementless acetabular cup in 17 hips (2020–2023)

2025-6-VS-lomas-4

Article Title: Medium‐term outcomes of hybrid total hip arthroplasty in cats: Cemented femoral stem and cementless acetabular cup in 17 hips (2020–2023)

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

šŸ”„100% would expect this on the real thing

šŸ¤”Useful, but not core exam material

šŸ—‘ļøNot relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
ā€
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
ā€
Mind trying that again?

In Korchek 2025 et al., on fracture gap risk, which implant variable was NOT significantly associated with implant failure in multivariable analysis?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. None of these implant-related variables showed a significant independent association with implant failure in multivariable analysis.
Incorrect. The correct answer is All of the above.
None of these implant-related variables showed a significant independent association with implant failure in multivariable analysis.

šŸ” 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-3

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?

šŸ”„100% would expect this on the real thing

šŸ¤”Useful, but not core exam material

šŸ—‘ļøNot relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
ā€
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
ā€
Mind trying that again?

In Meltzer 2022 et al., on femoral implant selection, which statement best describes the complication rate among dogs undergoing total hip replacement?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The study reported a 14% complication rate and no association between implant type and complication risk.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Total complication rate was 14% with no significant difference between implant types.
The study reported a 14% complication rate and no association between implant type and complication risk.

šŸ” Key Findings

  • Hybrid implants were used in older, heavier dogs with lower canal flare index (CFI) compared to cementless types.
  • CFI <1.8 was associated with higher risk of femoral fracture or stem subsidence with cementless implants.
  • Total complication rate was 14%, with catastrophic complications in only 1.5%—lower than reported in other studies.
  • No significant difference in complication rates across implant types (BFX, BFX-C, hybrid).
  • Femur fractures were rare (2.9%), lower than in prior studies, and successfully managed with cerclage/plate fixation.
  • Coxofemoral luxation was the most common complication (8 cases); all occurred within 62 days post-op, mostly resolved with revision.
  • Collared BFX stems did not significantly reduce complications, though they may limit stem subsidence.
  • An implant selection algorithm was proposed, using age ≄7 years, weight ≄45 kg, and CFI <1.8 to guide cemented vs. cementless stem use.

Meltzer

Veterinary Surgery

2

2022

Case factors for selection of femoral component type in canine hip arthroplasty using a modular system

2022-2-VS-meltzer-2

Article Title: Case factors for selection of femoral component type in canine hip arthroplasty using a modular system

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

šŸ”„100% would expect this on the real thing

šŸ¤”Useful, but not core exam material

šŸ—‘ļøNot relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
ā€
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
ā€
Mind trying that again?

In Carwardine 2024 et al., on screw placement in HIF, a lower implant AMI/bodyweight ratio was associated with which outcome?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. AMI/bodyweight was significantly lower in dogs with major complications (p = .037).
Incorrect. The correct answer is Higher risk of major complication.
AMI/bodyweight was significantly lower in dogs with major complications (p = .037).

šŸ” Key Findings

  • 73 elbows (52 dogs) underwent randomized medial or lateral transcondylar screw placement for HIF.
  • Lateral-to-medial placement resulted in a significantly higher rate of complications (62.2%) vs medial-to-lateral (19.4%) (p = .001).
  • Odds ratio for complications: 6.11 (95% CI: 2.13–17.52).
  • Most common complications: seromas (n = 13), surgical site infections (n = 16).
  • Implants with lower AMI/bodyweight were significantly associated with major complications (p = .037).
  • Only 4 procedures (5%) required revision surgery (major type I complications), with no difference by screw direction.
  • NNT = 2.3 for medial placement to prevent one complication.

Carwardine

Veterinary Surgery

2

2024

Medial versus lateral transcondylar screw placement for canine humeral intracondylar fissures: A randomized clinical trial

2024-2-VS-carwardine-4

Article Title: Medial versus lateral transcondylar screw placement for canine humeral intracondylar fissures: A randomized clinical trial

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

šŸ”„100% would expect this on the real thing

šŸ¤”Useful, but not core exam material

šŸ—‘ļøNot relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
ā€
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
ā€
Mind trying that again?

In Violini 2024 et al., on 3D-guided spinal stabilization in brachycephalic dogs, which of the following best describes the utility of 3D-printed drill guides?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. 3D-PSGs enabled accurate pedicle screw placement in small deformed vertebrae of brachycephalic dogs:contentReference[oaicite:4]{index=4}.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Enabled screw placement in deformed vertebrae.
3D-PSGs enabled accurate pedicle screw placement in small deformed vertebrae of brachycephalic dogs:contentReference[oaicite:4]{index=4}.

šŸ” Key Findings

  • Spinal stabilization with 3D-printed patient-specific drill guides (3D-PSGs) was safe, with no immediate perioperative complications reported.
  • 84% of pedicle screws were optimally placed, and only 0.5% breached the spinal canal, reflecting high placement accuracy.
  • 80% of dogs experienced no neurologic deterioration postoperatively, indicating reliable short-term safety.
  • 3D-PSGs were accurate and reproducible, even across multiple institutions and surgeons.
  • Mid-term outcomes were favorable: all dogs were ambulatory, and 90% had static or improved neurologic signs.
  • 7 of 10 mid-term follow-ups showed abnormal gait, though owners rated lifestyle ≄3/5, suggesting acceptable function.
  • 3D-printed guides enabled precise pedicle screw placement in deformed vertebrae, expanding options in small breeds.
  • One dog suffered a T4 spinous process fracture due to overextension of PMMA cement, emphasizing the need for cement placement caution.

Violini

Veterinary Surgery

4

2024

Clinical outcomes of 20 brachycephalic dogs with thoracolumbar spinal deformities causing neurological signs treated with spinal stabilization using 3D-printed patient-specific drill guides

2024-4-VS-violini-5

Article Title: Clinical outcomes of 20 brachycephalic dogs with thoracolumbar spinal deformities causing neurological signs treated with spinal stabilization using 3D-printed patient-specific drill guides

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

šŸ”„100% would expect this on the real thing

šŸ¤”Useful, but not core exam material

šŸ—‘ļøNot relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
ā€
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
ā€
Mind trying that again?

In Kimura 2025 et al., on mini-THA in <4 kg dogs, which intraoperative tool improved acetabular and femoral positioning?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Fluoroscopy allowed accurate implant placement in cases with femoral sclerosis or acetabular deformation:contentReference[oaicite:2]{index=2}.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Fluoroscopy.
Fluoroscopy allowed accurate implant placement in cases with femoral sclerosis or acetabular deformation:contentReference[oaicite:2]{index=2}.

šŸ” Key Findings

  • Zurich mini-cementless THA was successful in 9/10 hips in dogs <4 kg, with no lameness at 52 weeks in completed cases.
  • Helsinki Chronic Pain Index significantly improved from a mean of 19.8 to 2.3 at 52 weeks (p = 0.0141).
  • Fluoroscopy improved implant positioning, especially in LCPD and HD cases, aiding in accurate reaming and alignment.
  • Intraoperative complications occurred in 2/10 cases, including acetabular fractures; one case required discontinuation.
  • Prophylactic bicortical screws and reinforcement plates were used in cases with rotational instability or cortical compromise and were effective in preventing loosening/fractures.
  • Medial patellar luxation improved postoperatively in one dog, though recurrence was noted later without surgical correction.
  • No stem or implant loosening or fracture occurred over a mean follow-up of 24.4 months.
  • CT is recommended in preoperative planning, particularly in luxoid hip dysplasia cases with uncertain bone stock.

Kimura

Veterinary Surgery

6

2025

Long‐term outcomes of 10 dogs weighing less than 4 kg after Zurich mini‐cementless total hip arthroplasty

2025-6-VS-kimura-3

Article Title: Long‐term outcomes of 10 dogs weighing less than 4 kg after Zurich mini‐cementless total hip arthroplasty

Journal: Veterinary Surgery

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

šŸ”„100% would expect this on the real thing

šŸ¤”Useful, but not core exam material

šŸ—‘ļøNot relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
ā€
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
ā€
Mind trying that again?

In Butare-Smith 2022 et al., on cerclage knot biomechanics, which cerclage knot had the **highest initial tension** before testing?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. Double-loop had significantly higher resting tension, contributing to better fatigue resistance.
Incorrect. The correct answer is Double-loop knot (323 N).
Double-loop had significantly higher resting tension, contributing to better fatigue resistance.

šŸ” 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-3

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?

šŸ”„100% would expect this on the real thing

šŸ¤”Useful, but not core exam material

šŸ—‘ļøNot relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
ā€
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
ā€
Mind trying that again?

In Jeon 2025 et al., on distal femoral shortening, what was the **median femoral shortening ratio** required to achieve prosthesis reduction?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The median femoral shortening length ratio was 13.8% (range: 10.7–15.3%) to enable prosthesis reduction.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 13.8%.
The median femoral shortening length ratio was 13.8% (range: 10.7–15.3%) to enable prosthesis reduction.

šŸ” 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-2

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?

šŸ”„100% would expect this on the real thing

šŸ¤”Useful, but not core exam material

šŸ—‘ļøNot relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
ā€
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
ā€
Mind trying that again?

In Trefny 2025 et al., on plate length and stiffness, which plate length significantly increased construct stiffness over all shorter options?

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Correct. The 12-hole plate (80% plate–bone ratio) had significantly higher stiffness than all other lengths.
Incorrect. The correct answer is 12-hole.
The 12-hole plate (80% plate–bone ratio) had significantly higher stiffness than all other lengths.

šŸ” Key Findings

  • 12-hole LCPs (80% plate–bone ratio) showed significantly higher construct stiffness than 6-, 8-, or 10-hole plates in both compression and tension bending.
  • Strain on the plate was significantly lower in 12-hole vs 6-hole plates at all regions of interest (ROIs), especially around the fracture gap.
  • No incremental increases in stiffness or decreases in strain were observed between 6-, 8-, and 10-hole plates—only when comparing to 12-hole plates.
  • Bone model strain adjacent to the plate end was significantly lower for 10- and 12-hole plates vs 6-hole plates under both loading conditions.
  • The threshold effect suggests biomechanical benefits only emerge beyond a plate–bone ratio of ~80%.
  • Working length increased from 9.4 mm (6-hole) to 13 mm (others), potentially influencing strain/stiffness differences.
  • Four-point bending was used, as it replicates the most biomechanically relevant force on plated long bones.
  • Clinical implication: Longer plates may reduce plate strain and peri-implant bone strain, potentially lowering risk of fatigue failure or stress risers.

Trefny

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

2

2025

Effect of Plate Length on Construct Stiffness and Strain in a Synthetic Short-Fragment Fracture Gap Model Stabilized with a 3.5-mm Locking Compression Plate

2025-2-VCOT-trefny-1

Article Title: Effect of Plate Length on Construct Stiffness and Strain in a Synthetic Short-Fragment Fracture Gap Model Stabilized with a 3.5-mm Locking Compression Plate

Journal: Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology

How "Board-worthy" is this question?

šŸ”„100% would expect this on the real thing

šŸ¤”Useful, but not core exam material

šŸ—‘ļøNot relevant or too off-base

Thanks for the feedback!
ā€
We'll keep fine-tuning the question vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
ā€
Mind trying that again?

Quiz Results

Topic: Implant Selection & Configuration
70%

You answered 7 out of 10 questions correctly

Question 1:

āŒ Incorrect. You answered: Answer

Correct answer:

Rationale

Question 1:

āœ… 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.