Blood-Pool or Myocardial 3D Printing, Which One is Better for the Diagnosis of Types of Congenital Heart Disease?

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of blood pool and myocardial rigid models made by stereolithography in the diagnosis of different types of congenital heart disease (CHD). Two modeling methods were applied in the diagnosis of 8 cases, and two control groups consisting of cardiac experts and cardiac students diagnosed the cases using computed tomography (CT), blood pool models, and myocardial models. The importance, suitability, simulation degree, and preference of different models were analyzed. The average diagnostic rate of CT and 3D printing in the 8 cases was 88.75% and 95.9% in the expert group and 60% and 91.6% in the student group, respectively. 3D printing was considered to be more important for the diagnosis of complex CHDs (very important; average, 87.8%) than simple CHDs (very important; average, 30.8%). Myocardial models were considered most realistic regarding the structure of the heart (average, 92.5%). In cases of congenital corrected transposition of great arteries, Williams syndrome, coronary artery fistula, tetralogy of Fallot, patent ductus arteriosus, and coarctation of the aorta, blood pool models were considered more effective (average, 92.1%), while in cases of double outlet right ventricle and ventricular septal defect, myocardial models were considered optimal (average, 80%).