Comparative life cycle assessment of traditional and computer-guided dental surgical procedures

Purpose In recent years, dental implantology has greatly benefited from the introduction of innovative techniques aimed at improving clinical outcomes, reducing healing time and increasing patient comfort. However, the environmental implications of digital techniques remain unexplored. The purpose of this study is to assess and compare the environmental sustainability of traditional and digital dental implant placement workflows. Design/methodology/approach This study presents a comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) of two dental implant placement workflows: traditional technique and computer-guided approach. The latter exploits a 3D scanner and 3D printing technology to produce a surgical guide for implant placement. The analysis followed the ISO14040-44 standards and was conducted using data collected in a clinical environment and secondary data from literature and Ecoinvent database. The functional unit was defined as the surgical workflow for placing four implants, and impacts from preoperative, operative and postoperative phases were included. Findings Results showed that the computer-guided procedure reduced the global warming potential by 17% compared with the traditional approach (from 8.53 to 7.05 kg CO2 eq), mainly due to lower energy use and the elimination of consumable materials such as impression trays and plaster. The environmental contribution of digital technology machines was almost negligible due to low energy consumption and efficient material use. Results reliability was confirmed via a sensitivity analysis. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study provides the first comprehensive LCA of traditional and computer-guided dental implant workflows, demonstrating that digitalization and additive manufacturing can significantly improve the environmental sustainability of the dental healthcare sector.