Table 2.

3D-printed heart model accuracy in comparison with original source images according to the current literature. Modified from Lee et al. [22].

Studies Reporting Accuracy Comparison	No. of Models Printed	Comparisons	Mean Difference (mm)	Analysis Method
Lee et al. [22]	3	3D model vs. original CT 3D model vs. CT of 3D model 3D model vs. STL files Original CT images vs. STL files	0.21 ± 0.37 mm −0.11 ± 0.47 mm 0.1 ± 0.28/ 0.17 ± 0.48 mm 0.12 ± 0.23/ 0.12 ± 0.25 mm	Pearson’s correlation/ Bland–Altman plot
Valverde et al. [23]	40 (20 selected for accuracy comparison)	3D model vs. both CT and MRI 3D model vs. original CT 3D model vs. original MRI	0.27 ± 0.73 mm −0.16 ± 0.85 mm −0.30 ± 0.67 mm	Bland–Altman plot
Olejník et al. [24]	8	CT images vs. STL	0.19 ± 0.38 mm	Bland–Altman plot
		3D model vs. in vivo	0.13 ± 0.26 mm
Olivieri et al. [25]	9	3D model vs. echocardiography	0.4 ± 0.9 mm	Pearson’s correlation/ Bland–Altman plot
Lau et al. [26]	1	3D model vs. CT	0.23 mm	Pearson’s correlation
Mowers et al. [27]	5	2D echo vs. digital 3D	0 mm	Pearson’s correlation/ Bland–Altman plot
		2D echo vs. 3D model	0.3 mm
Parimi et al. [36]	5	3D model vs. rotational angiography	No significant difference between 3D models and biplane angiography measurements (p = 0.14)	Pearson’s correlation/ Bland–Altman plot

DICOM—digital imaging and communications in medicine, CT—computed tomography, MRI—magnetic resonance imaging, STL—standard tessellation language.