Structural and congenital heart disease interventions: the role of three-dimensional printing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advances in catheter-based interventions in structural and congenital heart disease have mandated an increased demand for three-dimensional (3D) visualisation of complex cardiac anatomy. Despite progress in 3D imaging modalities, the pre- and periprocedural visualisation of spatial anatomy is relegated to two-dimensional flat screen representations. 3D printing is an evolving technology based on the concept of additive manufacturing, where computerised digital surface renders are converted into physical models. Printed models replicate complex structures in tangible forms that cardiovascular physicians and surgeons can use for education, preprocedural planning and device testing. In this review we discuss the different steps of the 3D printing process, which include image acquisition, segmentation, printing methods and materials. We also examine the expanded applications of 3D printing in the catheter-based treatment of adult patients with structural and congenital heart disease while highlighting the current limitations of this technology in terms of segmentation, model accuracy and dynamic capabilities. Furthermore, we provide information on the resources needed to establish a hospital-based 3D printing laboratory.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".