ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
A 3D-printed surgical guide for ischemic scar targeting and ablation.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current trends, applications, and challenges in three-dimensional bioprinting for cardiovascular disease models and therapies.iScience · 2026Review
- Development of a patient-specific epicardial guide for ventricular tachycardia ablation surgery using high-consistency rubber silicone molding.Biomedical engineering online · 2025Article
- Impact of Disinfection and Sterilization on 3D-Printing Resin Performance for Surgical Guides in Cardiac Ablation Surgery.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Advancing Surgical Arrhythmia Ablation: Novel Insights on 3D Printing Applications and Two Biocompatible Materials.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- 3D-Printed Biomaterial Testing in Response to Cryoablation: Implications for Surgical Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: 3D printing technology development in medical fields allows to create 3D models to assist preoperative planning and support surgical procedures. Cardiac ischemic scar is clinically associated with malignant arrhythmias. Catheter ablation is aimed at eliminating the arrhythmogenic tissue until the sinus rhythm is restored. The scope of this work is to describe the workflow for a 3D surgical guide able to define the ischemic scar and target catheter ablation. Materials and methods: For the patient-specific 3D surgical guide and 3D heart phantom model realization, both CT scan and cardiac MRI images were processed; this was necessary to extract anatomical structures and pathological information, respectively. Medical images were uploaded and processed in 3D Slicer. For the surgical guide modeling, images from CT scan and MRI were loaded in Meshmixer and merged. For the heart phantom realization, only the CT segmentation was loaded in Meshmixer. The surgical guide was printed in MED625FLX with Polyjet technology. The heart phantom was printed in polylactide with FDM technology. Results: 3D-printed surgical model was in agreement with prespecified imputed measurements. The phantom fitting test showed high accuracy of the 3D surgical tool compared with the patient-specific reproduced heart. Anatomical references in the surgical guide ensured good stability. Ablation catheter fitting test showed high suitability of the guide for different ablation tools. Conclusion: A 3D-printed guide for ventricular tachycardia ablation is feasible and accurate in terms of measurements, stability, and geometrical structure. Concerning clinical use, further clinical investigations are eagerly awaited.
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.