Systematic review evaluates 3D printing's role in procedural planning and training for mitral valve disease, suggesting promising improvements.
OBJECTIVES: Mitral valve disease remains one of the most prevalent and complex cardiac conditions, with treatment strategies varying based on anatomical and pathological factors. The heterogeneity in mitral valve morphology complicates standardized treatment, highlighting the importance of procedural planning and surgical training. This systematic review evaluates current techniques, materials, and clinical applications of 3 D printing in mitral valve disease, with a focus on procedural planning and simulation. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed and MEDLINE databases was conducted to identify studies published from 1996 to August 2025. A total of 63 studies were included, all involving 3 D printing technologies related to mitral valve disease. Extracted data covered imaging modalities, software tools, printing techniques, materials used, total time required for model creation, and clinical applications. RESULTS: CT, 3 D transoesophageal echocardiography, and MRI were the main imaging modalities, with CT being the most common. Data segmentation and model generation were performed using software such as Mimics, 3 D Slicer, and Philips QLAB. The primary 3 D printing techniques were stereolithography, fused deposition modelling, and PolyJet, using photopolymer resins and thermoplastics. Total processing time-from image acquisition to model completion-ranged from 45 min to 72 hours, depending on complexity. Applications included procedural planning, surgical training, and the development of medical and simulation-based educational devices. CONCLUSIONS: 3 D printing enhances mitral valve surgery by enabling precise planning and training. Although challenges like standardization and accessibility persist, advances in imaging, software, and materials are expected to expand its clinical impact.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pavlykova-Chertovska et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: