This systematic literature review examines the applications and outcomes of 3D printing in medical settings, focusing on surgical uses. The review analyzed 227 papers, highlighting the use of 3D printing in surgical guides, anatomical models, and custom implants across various surgical domains, including orthopedics, maxillofacial surgery, cranial surgery, and spinal surgery. Key advantages of 3D-printed parts include reduced surgical time, improved medical outcomes, and decreased radiation exposure. However, the costs of printing and additional scans often increase overall procedure costs. The review found that 3D printing is well integrated into surgical practice and research, with applications ranging from anatomical models for surgical planning to surgical guides and implants. While several advantages of 3D-printed applications were identified, further research is needed to determine whether the increased intervention costs can be balanced with the benefits of this technology. A formal cost-effectiveness analysis is recommended. 3D printing is used to create anatomical models for surgical planning, which can improve surgical outcomes and reduce operation time. Custom implants made using 3D printing have shown benefits in reducing OR time and improving medical outcomes, though costs can increase. Surgical guides, the most common application of 3D printing, have been shown to reduce OR time and improve clinical outcomes, though some studies suggest they may be more expensive than traditional methods. Molds for prosthetics and models for implant shaping are also used in 3D printing applications. The review found that 3D printing can reduce the need for fluoroscopy during spinal surgery, thereby reducing radiation exposure. However, the accuracy of 3D-printed guides and models can vary, and their effectiveness depends on factors such as the manufacturer and the time between the scan and surgery. The review also highlights the importance of cost-effectiveness in the adoption of 3D printing technology. While some studies suggest that 3D-printed guides can be cost-effective, others indicate that the additional costs may outweigh the benefits. The review concludes that 3D printing has significant potential in medical applications, but further research is needed to fully understand its cost-effectiveness and long-term benefits.This systematic literature review examines the applications and outcomes of 3D printing in medical settings, focusing on surgical uses. The review analyzed 227 papers, highlighting the use of 3D printing in surgical guides, anatomical models, and custom implants across various surgical domains, including orthopedics, maxillofacial surgery, cranial surgery, and spinal surgery. Key advantages of 3D-printed parts include reduced surgical time, improved medical outcomes, and decreased radiation exposure. However, the costs of printing and additional scans often increase overall procedure costs. The review found that 3D printing is well integrated into surgical practice and research, with applications ranging from anatomical models for surgical planning to surgical guides and implants. While several advantages of 3D-printed applications were identified, further research is needed to determine whether the increased intervention costs can be balanced with the benefits of this technology. A formal cost-effectiveness analysis is recommended. 3D printing is used to create anatomical models for surgical planning, which can improve surgical outcomes and reduce operation time. Custom implants made using 3D printing have shown benefits in reducing OR time and improving medical outcomes, though costs can increase. Surgical guides, the most common application of 3D printing, have been shown to reduce OR time and improve clinical outcomes, though some studies suggest they may be more expensive than traditional methods. Molds for prosthetics and models for implant shaping are also used in 3D printing applications. The review found that 3D printing can reduce the need for fluoroscopy during spinal surgery, thereby reducing radiation exposure. However, the accuracy of 3D-printed guides and models can vary, and their effectiveness depends on factors such as the manufacturer and the time between the scan and surgery. The review also highlights the importance of cost-effectiveness in the adoption of 3D printing technology. While some studies suggest that 3D-printed guides can be cost-effective, others indicate that the additional costs may outweigh the benefits. The review concludes that 3D printing has significant potential in medical applications, but further research is needed to fully understand its cost-effectiveness and long-term benefits.