Clinical Efficacy and Accuracy of 3D-Printed Medical Devices: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

AIM: This systematic review aimed to assess the clinical and experimental utility of three-dimensional (3D) printing in medical and dental applications, with a focus on its impact on surgical precision, procedural efficiency, and patient-centered results. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Database searches identified 481 records, of which 15 studies were included in the review; eight contributed to one or more meta-analyses. Quantitative analysis assessed operative time and intraoperative blood loss using mean differences with random-effects models. Study quality was evaluated using NOS, Cochrane RoB 2, and ROBINS-I tools. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included; eight contributed to at least one meta-analysis. At the study level, 5 of 7 comparative studies (71.4%) favored 3D printing for accuracy, fit, alignment, or planning; all 10 studies reporting procedural or operative time favored it; and 4 of 7 (57.1%) reported better patient-centered or functional outcomes. Random-effects models showed no statistically significant reduction in operative time (MD, -24.88 min; 95% CI, -62.45 to 12.70; p = 0.19; I 2 = 100%) and significantly lower intraoperative blood loss (MD, -61.55 mL; 95% CI, -82.62 to -40.49; p < 0.001; I 2 = 83%). CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence suggests that 3D printing may improve procedural precision, patient-specific planning, and selected clinical outcomes; however, extreme heterogeneity and limited outcome-specific evidence preclude broad generalization.