Clinical Value of Virtual Reality versus 3D Printing in Congenital Heart Disease

Both three-dimensional (3D) printing and virtual reality (VR) are reported as being superior to the current visualization techniques in conveying more comprehensive visualization of congenital heart disease (CHD). However, little is known in terms of their clinical value in diagnostic assessment, me...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ivan Lau, Ashu Gupta, Zhonghua Sun
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2021-06-01
Series:Biomolecules
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2218-273X/11/6/884
id doaj-fd30cd4b55cc4e09a4858d8b73b2c04d
record_format Article
spelling doaj-fd30cd4b55cc4e09a4858d8b73b2c04d2021-07-01T00:09:36ZengMDPI AGBiomolecules2218-273X2021-06-011188488410.3390/biom11060884Clinical Value of Virtual Reality versus 3D Printing in Congenital Heart DiseaseIvan Lau0Ashu Gupta1Zhonghua Sun2Discipline of Medical Radiation Science, Curtin Medical School, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6102, AustraliaDepartment of Medical Imaging, Fiona Stanley Hospital, Perth, WA 6150, AustraliaDiscipline of Medical Radiation Science, Curtin Medical School, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6102, AustraliaBoth three-dimensional (3D) printing and virtual reality (VR) are reported as being superior to the current visualization techniques in conveying more comprehensive visualization of congenital heart disease (CHD). However, little is known in terms of their clinical value in diagnostic assessment, medical education, and preoperative planning of CHD. This cross-sectional study aims to address these by involving 35 medical practitioners to subjectively evaluate VR visualization of four selected CHD cases in comparison with the corresponding 3D printed heart models (3DPHM). Six questionnaires were excluded due to incomplete sections, hence a total of 29 records were included for the analysis. The results showed both VR and 3D printed heart models were comparable in terms of the degree of realism. VR was perceived as more useful in medical education and preoperative planning compared to 3D printed heart models, although there was no significant difference in the ratings (<i>p</i> = 0.54 and 0.35, respectively). Twenty-one participants (72%) indicated both the VR and 3DPHM provided additional benefits compared to the conventional medical imaging visualizations. This study concludes the similar clinical value of both VR and 3DPHM in CHD, although further research is needed to involve more cardiac specialists for their views on the usefulness of these tools.https://www.mdpi.com/2218-273X/11/6/8843D printingvirtual realitycongenital heart diseasediagnosisvisualization
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Ivan Lau
Ashu Gupta
Zhonghua Sun
spellingShingle Ivan Lau
Ashu Gupta
Zhonghua Sun
Clinical Value of Virtual Reality versus 3D Printing in Congenital Heart Disease
Biomolecules
3D printing
virtual reality
congenital heart disease
diagnosis
visualization
author_facet Ivan Lau
Ashu Gupta
Zhonghua Sun
author_sort Ivan Lau
title Clinical Value of Virtual Reality versus 3D Printing in Congenital Heart Disease
title_short Clinical Value of Virtual Reality versus 3D Printing in Congenital Heart Disease
title_full Clinical Value of Virtual Reality versus 3D Printing in Congenital Heart Disease
title_fullStr Clinical Value of Virtual Reality versus 3D Printing in Congenital Heart Disease
title_full_unstemmed Clinical Value of Virtual Reality versus 3D Printing in Congenital Heart Disease
title_sort clinical value of virtual reality versus 3d printing in congenital heart disease
publisher MDPI AG
series Biomolecules
issn 2218-273X
publishDate 2021-06-01
description Both three-dimensional (3D) printing and virtual reality (VR) are reported as being superior to the current visualization techniques in conveying more comprehensive visualization of congenital heart disease (CHD). However, little is known in terms of their clinical value in diagnostic assessment, medical education, and preoperative planning of CHD. This cross-sectional study aims to address these by involving 35 medical practitioners to subjectively evaluate VR visualization of four selected CHD cases in comparison with the corresponding 3D printed heart models (3DPHM). Six questionnaires were excluded due to incomplete sections, hence a total of 29 records were included for the analysis. The results showed both VR and 3D printed heart models were comparable in terms of the degree of realism. VR was perceived as more useful in medical education and preoperative planning compared to 3D printed heart models, although there was no significant difference in the ratings (<i>p</i> = 0.54 and 0.35, respectively). Twenty-one participants (72%) indicated both the VR and 3DPHM provided additional benefits compared to the conventional medical imaging visualizations. This study concludes the similar clinical value of both VR and 3DPHM in CHD, although further research is needed to involve more cardiac specialists for their views on the usefulness of these tools.
topic 3D printing
virtual reality
congenital heart disease
diagnosis
visualization
url https://www.mdpi.com/2218-273X/11/6/884
work_keys_str_mv AT ivanlau clinicalvalueofvirtualrealityversus3dprintingincongenitalheartdisease
AT ashugupta clinicalvalueofvirtualrealityversus3dprintingincongenitalheartdisease
AT zhonghuasun clinicalvalueofvirtualrealityversus3dprintingincongenitalheartdisease
_version_ 1721349400691736576