ArticleAnnals of pediatric cardiology
Utility of virtual reality imaging to guide complex structural cardiac interventions: A randomized controlled trial.
Article in Annals of pediatric cardiology. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate preprocedural planning is critical for complex transcatheter structural heart interventions. Virtual reality (VR) enhanced imaging may improve accuracy compared to conventional computed tomography (CT) and may reduce variability between operators of differing experience levels. Methods: A randomized study evaluated the utility of VR across three complex interventions: sinus venosus defect (SVD) closure, pulmonary artery (PA) stenting, and percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation (PPVI). The preprocedural planning was randomized to either CT alone or CT plus VR. Independent planning based solely on CT, performed by a senior cardiologist (experience >25 years) and a junior cardiologist (experience > 5 years), was compared with CT plus VR analysis performed by the junior cardiologist. Deviation in plan during the actual intervention was analyzed. Results: Forty patients (20 SVD closure, 12 PA stents, and 8 PPVI) were randomized to receive either CT alone or CT plus VR. Comparable demographics confirmed effective randomization. The Friedman test revealed a significant overall difference ( Conclusions: The VR interpretation by a junior cardiologist matched the senior cardiologist's plan based on CT alone and outperformed the junior cardiologist's plan when using CT alone. This indicates the potential of VR to accelerate training in structural interventions and standardize preprocedural planning.
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.