BACKGROUND: Precise knowledge of cardiac anatomy is mandatory for diagnosis and treatment of congenital heart disease. Modern imaging techniques allow high resolution three-dimensional (3D) imaging of the heart and great vessels. In this study stereolithography was evaluated for 3D reconstructions of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data. METHODS: A plastinated heart specimen was scanned with MDCT and after segmentation a stereolithographic (STL) model was produced with laser sinter technique. After scanning the STL model with MDCT these data were compared with those of the original specimen after rigid registration using the iterative closest points algorithm (ICP). The two surfaces of the original specimen and STL model were matched and the symmetric mean distance was calculated. Additionally, the heart and great vessels of patients (age range 41 days-21 years) with congenital heart anomalies were imaged with MDCT (n=2) or free breathing steady, state free-precession MRI (n=3). STL models were produced from these datasets and the cardiac segments were analyzed by two independent observers. RESULTS: All cardiac structures of the heart specimen were reconstructed as a STL model within sub-millimeter resolution (mean surface distance 0.27+/-0.76 mm). Cardiac segments of the STL patient models were correctly analyzed by two independent observers compared to the original 3D datasets, echocardiography (n=5), x-ray angiography (n=5), and surgery (n=4). CONCLUSIONS: High resolution MDCT or MRI 3D datasets can be accurately reconstructed using laser sinter technique. Teaching, research and preoperative planning may be facilitated in the future using this technique.
BACKGROUND: Precise knowledge of cardiac anatomy is mandatory for diagnosis and treatment of congenital heart disease. Modern imaging techniques allow high resolution three-dimensional (3D) imaging of the heart and great vessels. In this study stereolithography was evaluated for 3D reconstructions of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data. METHODS: A plastinated heart specimen was scanned with MDCT and after segmentation a stereolithographic (STL) model was produced with laser sinter technique. After scanning the STL model with MDCT these data were compared with those of the original specimen after rigid registration using the iterative closest points algorithm (ICP). The two surfaces of the original specimen and STL model were matched and the symmetric mean distance was calculated. Additionally, the heart and great vessels of patients (age range 41 days-21 years) with congenital heart anomalies were imaged with MDCT (n=2) or free breathing steady, state free-precession MRI (n=3). STL models were produced from these datasets and the cardiac segments were analyzed by two independent observers. RESULTS: All cardiac structures of the heart specimen were reconstructed as a STL model within sub-millimeter resolution (mean surface distance 0.27+/-0.76 mm). Cardiac segments of the STL patient models were correctly analyzed by two independent observers compared to the original 3D datasets, echocardiography (n=5), x-ray angiography (n=5), and surgery (n=4). CONCLUSIONS: High resolution MDCT or MRI 3D datasets can be accurately reconstructed using laser sinter technique. Teaching, research and preoperative planning may be facilitated in the future using this technique.
Authors: Thomas Sangild Sørensen; Hermann Körperich; Gerald F Greil; Joachim Eichhorn; Peter Barth; Hans Meyer; Erik Morre Pedersen; Philipp Beerbaum Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-06-21 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Sibylle Mottl-Link; Thomas Boettger; Julia J Krueger; Urte Rietdorf; Bernhard Schnackenburg; Peter Ewert; Felix Berger; Eike Nagel; Hans-Peter Meinzer; Amy Juraszek; Titus Kuehne; Ivo Wolf Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-12-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: R Sodian; P Fu; C Lueders; D Szymanski; C Fritsche; M Gutberlet; S P Hoerstrup; H Hausmann; T Lueth; R Hetzer Journal: Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 1.827
Authors: Eimir Perez-Arjona; Manuel Dujovny; Hun Park; Djoldas Kulyanov; Alexander Galaniuk; Celso Agner; Daniel Michael; Fernando G Diaz Journal: Neurol Res Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 2.448
Authors: Matthias Stuber; René M Botnar; Stefan E Fischer; Rolf Lamerichs; Jouke Smink; Paul Harvey; Warren J Manning Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Mathias Seitel; Lena Maier-Hein; Alexander Seitel; Alfred M Franz; Hannes Kenngott; Raffaele De Simone; Ivo Wolf; Hans-Peter Meinzer Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2009-06-03 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Matthias Hammon; Oliver Rompel; Hannes Seuss; Sven Dittrich; Michael Uder; Andrè Rüffer; Robert Cesnjevar; Nicole Ehret; Martin Glöckler Journal: Pediatr Cardiol Date: 2017-07-31 Impact factor: 1.655