Article3D printing in medicine2018
3D printing for congenital heart disease: a single site's initial three-yearexperience.
Article in 3D printing in medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of 3D Printing on Cardiac Surgery in Congenital Heart Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024Pooled it
- A three-dimensional printed model in preoperative consent for ventricular septal defect repair.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2021Trial
- Feasibility of 3D echocardiography-CT/CMR fusion to create atrioventricular valve-integrated 3D printed heart models in complex congenital heart disease: greater incremental benefit for surgeons than cardiac imagers.3D printing in medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical Impact of Patient-Specific 3D Models in Neonatal Surgery: A Case-Based Review of Applications and Future Directions.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Review
- A Retrospective Time and Value Analysis of Surgical Oncology Cases Using 3D Printing: A Comprehensive Cancer Center Experience.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Assessing the Feasibility and Utility of Patient-Specific 3D Advanced Visualization Modeling in Cerebrovascular Disease: Retrospective Analysis and Prospective Survey Pilot Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the Efficacy and Accuracy of Super-Flexible Three-Dimensional Heart Models of Congenital Heart Disease Made via Stereolithography Printing and Vacuum Casting: A Multicenter Clinical Trial.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Article
- SDF4CHD: Generative modeling of cardiac anatomies with congenital heart defects.Medical image analysis · 2024Article
- Cardiovascular computed tomography in cardiovascular disease: An overview of its applications from diagnosis to prediction.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2024Article
- Cardiovascular Computed Tomography in the Diagnosis of Cardiovascular Disease: Beyond Lumen Assessment.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Review
- Article
- Assessment of Staphylococcus Aureus growth on biocompatible 3D printed materials.3D printing in medicine · 2023Article
- A Systematic Analysis of Additive Manufacturing Techniques in the Bioengineering of In Vitro Cardiovascular Models.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2023Review
- The Quantitative Impact of Using 3D Printed Anatomical Models for Surgical Planning Optimization: Literature Review.3D printing and additive manufacturing · 2023Review
- Three-Dimensional Bioprinting in Cardiovascular Disease: Current Status and Future Directions.Biomolecules · 2023Review
- Mixed reality navigation training system for liver surgery based on a high-definition human cross-sectional anatomy data set.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Patient-Specific 3D-Printed Models in Pediatric Congenital Heart Disease.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Three-dimensional printing and virtual reconstruction in surgical planning of double-outlet right ventricle repair.JTCVS techniques · 2023Article
- Impact of multi-lattice inner structures on FDM PLA 3D printed orthosis using Industry 4.0 concepts.International journal on interactive design and manufacturing · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background3D printing is an ideal manufacturing process for creating patient-matched models (anatomical models) for surgical and interventional planning. Cardiac anatomical models have been described in numerous case studies and journal publications. However, few studies attempt to describe wider impact of the novel planning augmentation tool. The work here presents the evolution of an institution's first 3 full years of 3D prints following consistent integration of the technology into clinical workflow (2012-2014) - a center which produced 79 models for surgical planning (within that time frame). Patient outcomes and technology acceptance following implementation of 3D printing were reviewed.
methodsA retrospective analysis was designed to investigate the anatomical model's impact on time-based surgical metrics. A contemporaneous cohort of standard-of-care pre-procedural planning (no anatomical models) was identified for comparative analysis. A post-surgery technology acceptance assessment was also employed in a smaller subset to measure perceived efficacy of the anatomical models. The data was examined.
resultsWithin the timeframe of the study, 928 primary-case cardiothoracic surgeries (encompassing both CHD and non-CHD surgeries) took place at the practicing pediatric hospital. One hundred sixty four anatomical models had been generated for various purposes. An inclusion criterion based on lesion type limited those with anatomic models to 33; there were 113 cases matching the same criterion that received no anatomical model. Time-based metrics such as case length-of-time showed a mean reduction in overall time for anatomical models. These reductions were not statistically significant. The technology acceptance survey did demonstrate strong perceived efficacy. Anecdotal vignettes further support the technology acceptance. DISCUSSION &
conclusionThe anatomical models demonstrate trends for reduced operating room and case length of time when compared with similar surgeries in the same time-period; in turn, these reductions could have significant impact on patient outcomes and operating room economics. While analysis did not yield robust statistical powering, strong Cohen's d values suggest poor powering may be more related to sample size than non-ideal outcomes. The utility of planning with an anatomical model is further supported by the technology acceptance study which demonstrated that surgeons perceive the anatomical models to be an effective tool in surgical planning for a complex CHD repair. A prospective multi-center trial is currently in progress to further validate or reject these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.