ArticleJournal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques2025
3D-printed in vitro models of Stanford type B aortic dissection: A scoping review.
Article in Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient-specific three-dimensional-printed phantoms have emerged as valuable tools for simulating Stanford type B aortic dissections in vitro, enabling detailed studies of dissection morphology, hemodynamics, and interventional techniques under controlled, anatomically realistic conditions. Despite their potential, current methodologies remain heterogeneous and lack standardization. This scoping review, compliant with the PRISMA guidelines, systematically evaluated literature describing additive-manufactured flexible aortic phantoms specifically for pulsatile flow experiments or endovascular procedures. From an initial pool of 120 publications, five studies met the inclusion criteria, all using clinical imaging data and PolyJet-technology with flexible photopolymers. Four studies used full-scale models to simulate hemodynamics or thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and one investigated imaging properties in smaller segments. Although these phantoms reliably replicate dissection anatomy and flow patterns, widespread adoption is constrained by resource demands, simplified wall mechanics, exclusion of smaller vessel branches, and variable fabrication methods. Additional limitations include material durability and single-use designs. Standardizing fabrication protocols and developing advanced biomimetic materials could significantly enhance the physiological accuracy, reproducibility, and practicality of these models. Patient-specific three-dimensional-printed type B aortic dissections phantoms thus represent potentially valuable tools for improving surgical training, procedural rehearsal, morphological insights, and device innovation, ultimately bridging benchtop simulations and clinical practice.
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.