ReviewCureus2025
Three-Dimensional (3D) Printing for Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Device Sizing: A Systematic Review and Comparative Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, the clinical application of three-dimensional (3D) printing technology has shown great potential in surgical planning. The left atrial appendage (LAA) is a key site for thrombus formation in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), increasing the risk of stroke. One recent application of this technology is for LAA occlusion, a procedure used to seal the LAA and prevent the formation of systemic thromboembolism associated with NVAF in patients with contraindications for oral anticoagulation therapy. In this systematic review, the use of 3D printing for device sizing during the planning of LAA occlusion procedures was evaluated through a literature search using the following keywords: ("Left atrial appendage" OR "LAA" or "intra-atrial mass" OR "left atrial mass" ) AND ("3D printing" OR "additive manufacturing" OR "rapid prototyping" OR "computer-aided design" OR "CAD" OR "bioprinting") AND ("occlusion" OR "closure" OR "device sizing" OR "atrial fibrillation"). After data extraction, 16 studies reported using 3D printing, prospectively or retrospectively, to estimate the accuracy of LAA device sizing and/or deployment. These studies demonstrated that 3D-printed models can improve anatomical measurements and allow for improved device sizing and implantation compared to standard-of-care imaging-assisted procedural planning. Of the articles included in this review, two articles found a significant reduction in devices used per procedure (from 1.7 to 1.1 and 1.20 to 1.05, respectively), with shorter procedure times in the 3D-printed groups. Additionally, the 3D-printed models showed fewer devices deployed per procedure, perivascular leaks, and residual shunts. Additionally, one article found fewer perivascular leaks in the 3D group (one vs. four in controls), and one article showed no residual shunts in the 3D group compared to 14.29% in controls. Although the 16 studies included in this review demonstrate the value of 3D printing in LAA occlusion procedures, the findings underscore the need for larger, multicenter studies to further quantify its clinical benefits, particularly in improving procedural planning and reducing complications in the intravascular treatment of LAA thrombosis in NVAF. Future research should focus on multicenter trials, larger cohorts, and testing 3D-printed occlusion devices for personalized treatments.
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.