1. Initial experience with cinematic rendering for the visualization of extracardiac anatomy in complex congenital heart defects†
- Author
-
Martin Glöckler, Ariawan Purbojo, André Rüffer, Robert Cesnjevar, Florian Röschl, and Sven Dittrich
- Subjects
Heart Defects, Congenital ,Male ,Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine ,Computed Tomography Angiography ,Aorta, Thoracic ,Computed tomography ,Pulmonary Artery ,030204 cardiovascular system & hematology ,Preoperative care ,Rendering (computer graphics) ,03 medical and health sciences ,Imaging, Three-Dimensional ,0302 clinical medicine ,Multidetector Computed Tomography ,Anterior interventricular sulcus ,medicine ,Humans ,In patient ,610 Medicine & health ,Retrospective Studies ,medicine.diagnostic_test ,business.industry ,Infant, Newborn ,Infant ,Reproducibility of Results ,Volume rendering ,Anatomy ,Visualization ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,030228 respiratory system ,Echocardiography ,Pulmonary Veins ,Preoperative Period ,Female ,Surgery ,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine ,business ,Depth perception ,Follow-Up Studies - Abstract
OBJECTIVES Detailed anatomical information is essential for planning of surgical therapy in patients with congenital heart disease. We wanted to determine whether cinematic rendering, the novel 3-dimensional visualization technique, could help paediatric cardiac surgeons achieve better preoperative visualization of the extracardiac anatomy in patients with complex congenital heart defects. Therefore, cinematic rendering was compared to the traditional volume rendering technique by means of a questionnaire with predefined criteria. METHODS Picture sets from 20 infant patients (mean age = 17 days) were generated from computed tomography data with both the cinematic rendering and the volume rendering techniques. These were presented side by side in a digital high-resolution portfolio without labelling them. Three experienced paediatric cardiac surgeons were provided with these portfolios and a questionnaire. They were asked to evaluate the images individually in predefined categories on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 = 'fully acceptable' to 4 = 'unacceptable'. RESULTS Cinematic rendering scored significantly better values on the Likert scale in 7 of 9 categories, namely 'spatial impression in general', 'depth perception', 'delineation of the atrial appendages/pulmonary veins/peripheral pulmonary arteries', 'assessability of the anterior interventricular sulcus' and 'assessability of the aortic arch branches'. CONCLUSIONS Cinematic rendering is a valuable software tool, and our data suggest that it provides significantly better visualization than volume rendering. The surgeons appraised improved depth perception and delineation of structures adjacent to the heart as the most significant advantages.
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF