ArticlePediatric cardiology2026
An Initial Experience in the Use of 3D ICE for the Periprocedural Guidance of Percutaneous ASD Closure at a Tertiary Pediatric Center.
Article in Pediatric cardiology, 2026. 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
The dynamic, multiplanar nature of the atrial septum can make ASDs challenging to characterize with 2D imaging. 3D imaging instantly profiles defect(s) in a single, en face view. 2D ICE-guided ASD device closure in the pediatric population has been reported, but 3D ICE-guided closure has not, and the correlation of 3D ICE measurements with fluoroscopic balloon-sizing diameter (BSD) remains unstudied. We describe our initial experience with 3D ICE in the periprocedural evaluation of percutaneous ASD closure. Consecutive patients undergoing percutaneous ASD closure at our institution from July 2022 to July 2023 were included. BSD was measured by the primary interventionalist, and non-invasive ASD dimensions were measured by two investigators intra-procedurally. Correlations were assessed between maximal BSD versus maximal ASD diameter by 2D (TEE, ICE) and 3D modalities (TEE, ICE). Fifteen patients underwent percutaneous ASD closure, and 11/15 (73%) underwent ICE (2D and 3D). Three cases omitted ICE due to equipment unavailability, and one due to inadequate imaging windows related to spinal rods. 10 of 11 patients also underwent TEE, while one had ASD closure by fluoroscopy and ICE alone due to provider preference. Six of ten TEEs (60%) included 3D imaging based on weight cut-off. The median age of ICE patients was 6 years (IQR: 7.5), with a median weight of 20.5 kg (IQR: 35.8). 3D ICE was attempted in all; image quality assessed as 'fair' or 'good' by two reviewers in 8/11 patients. Intraprocedural imaging correlated strongly with BSD [3D ICE vs. BSD (n = 7): ICC = 0.915, p < 0.001)]. Median pre-device deployment evaluation time by ICE was 14 min (IQR: 8.25), and 5 min (IQR: 3.0) post-device deployment. 3D ICE is a viable adjunctive imaging tool for guiding ASD closure procedures within the pediatric cohort, offering safety, efficiency, and congruence with established imaging modalities. Maximal ASD dimensions by 3D ICE correlate well with BSD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40498143What 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.