ArticleScientific reports2022
Comparison of blood pool and myocardial 3D printing in the diagnosis of types of congenital heart disease.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances and Prospects in Using Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells for 3D Bioprinting in Cardiac Tissue Engineering.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Applications of 3D Printing Technology in Diagnosis and Management of Heart Failure.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Clinical situations for which 3D printing is considered an appropriate representation or extension of data contained in a medical imaging examination: pediatric congenital heart disease conditions.3D printing in medicine · 2024Review
- Narrative review of single ventricle: where are we after 40 years?Translational pediatrics · 2023Review
- Patient-Specific 3D-Printed Models in Pediatric Congenital Heart Disease.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Clinical Applications of Mixed Reality and 3D Printing in Congenital Heart Disease.Biomolecules · 2022Article
- 3D Printed Models in Cardiovascular Disease: An Exciting Future to Deliver Personalized Medicine.Micromachines · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of blood pool and myocardial models made by stereolithography in the diagnosis of different types of congenital heart disease (CHD). Two modeling methods were applied in the diagnosis of 8 cases, and two control groups consisting of experts and students diagnosed the cases using echocardiography with computed tomography, blood pool models, and myocardial models. The importance, suitability, and simulation degree of different models were analyzed. The average diagnostic rate before and after 3D printing was used was 88.75% and 95.9% (P = 0.001) in the expert group and 60% and 91.6% (P = 0.000) in the student group, respectively. 3D printing was considered to be more important for the diagnosis of complex CHDs (very important; average, 87.8%) than simple CHDs (very important; average, 30.8%) (P = 0.000). Myocardial models were considered most realistic regarding the structure of the heart (average, 92.5%). In cases of congenital corrected transposition of great arteries, Williams syndrome, coronary artery fistula, tetralogy of Fallot, patent ductus arteriosus, and coarctation of the aorta, blood pool models were considered more effective (average, 92.1%), while in cases of double outlet right ventricle and ventricular septal defect, myocardial models were considered optimal (average, 80%).
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.