Background/Objectives: Bone grafting is fundamental in oral implantology in order to achieve appropriate esthetic and functional results. One of the options for bone grafting is the use of allografts, which can be produced using femoral heads removed during orthopedic surgeries in accordance with the principles of the circular economy. The aim of this study is to examine the environmental impacts of the production of cancellous block and granulates of bone graft materials produced in this way. Methods: The cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment was performed at the Petz Aladár University Teaching Hospital Tissue Bank Department, Győr, Hungary, with the system boundaries defined and the bone graft material produced during a production process defined as a functional unit. The environmental impacts were determined with the OpenLCA v2.5.0. software, using the ReCiPe v1.03 2016 midpoint (H) and endpoint (H) assessment methods. Results: During the production process, 500 g of bone graft material is produced in both forms, packaged as 1 g. The carbon footprint of the production of the cancellous bone block was 88,972 kgCO₂-Eq, while that of the bone granulates was 100,033 kgCO₂-Eq, to which the chemicals used for the degreasing and deantigenization of the bone tissue contributed the most. Within the impact categories, the material resources of metals–minerals, terrestrial ecotoxicity and climate change contributed the most to the environmental impacts. Within most impact categories, electricity was the most significant influencing factor. Conclusions: The environmental impact of the production of bone substitute granulates is greater than that of the bone block, to which the packaging of the products contributes primarily.

Background/Objectives: To make a dental office more environmentally conscious, it is essential to use eco-friendly disinfectants without compromising patient safety. Our aim was to examine and compare the effectiveness of the commonly used conventional disinfectants in Romania with the effectiveness of available eco-friendly disinfectants. Methods: Two traditional (Gigasept, Zeta 1 Ultra), and two eco-friendly (IDactiv, Sekusept Aktiv) disinfectants and an eco-friendly (gigazyme) cleaning agent were compared. For a thorough evaluation, minimal inhibitory and bactericidal concentration (MIC/MBC) tests were conducted, along with a Bradford assay to measure the concentration of residual proteins on instruments contaminated by controlled contamination and dental office use after disinfection. Results: During the MIC test, with the exception of Gigazyme^®, which is an enzymatic cleaner, all of the tested disinfectants were effective in the case of the bacterial reference strains used at the concentration prescribed by the manufacturers. After disinfection, the amount of protein remaining on the dental instruments did not exceed the maximum concentration according to the ISO 15883-5:2005 protocol, and the protein removal efficiency was between 96.04% and 99.03% for all disinfectants. In the MIC/MBC test, the peracetic acid-based Sekusept Aktiv was the most effective, while Gigazyme^® and BossKlein IDactiv^® showed the highest protein removal efficiency. Conclusions: The tested eco-friendly disinfectants meet the necessary performance criteria and thus offer a sustainable alternative to traditional disinfectants.

Background/Objectives: Healthcare activities contribute significantly to climate change and environmental pollution. The demand for bone grafting is increasing, and the biological properties of bone substitute materials are critically important. A methodology aimed at preserving BMPs may offer an opportunity to improve the biological properties of donor cadaver-derived bone grafts. The aim of this study was to conduct a life cycle assessment of the BMP-preserving approach used in allograft production in order to enhance the environmental sustainability of bone grafting. Methods: Following primary data collection at the West Hungarian Regional Tissue Bank, environmental impacts were assessed using the OpenLCA software and the ReCiPe v1.03 (2016) midpoint and endpoint impact categories. A sensitivity analysis was also conducted under six alternative scenarios to evaluate which changes would have the greatest beneficial effect on environmental impacts. Results: The greatest environmental impacts of allograft production were observed in the categories of material resources: metals and minerals, terrestrial ecotoxicity, and climate change. The climate change impact was 66.759 kg CO₂-eq. The environmental impacts of the production process also had a significant influence on human health, with a total DALY value of 6.58 h. The impacts were primarily driven by electricity consumption and the chemicals used; however, in several impact categories, waste management also contributed substantially. Conclusions: Transitioning to more sustainable energy sources (e.g., wind power) would substantially improve the environmental performance of allograft production. Further research is needed to identify more sustainable alternatives for the chemical agents used during processing.

Background/Objectives: Dental procedures are generally not considered environmentally sustainable; however, there is a growing emphasis on the implementation of environmentally conscious practices in dentistry. Despite this shift, the environmental impact of oral surgical interventions remains insufficiently investigated. The odontectomy of impacted teeth represents the most frequently performed procedure in oral surgery. The aim of this study was to conduct a cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment of the odontectomy of submucosal and intraosseous impacted teeth. Methods: To perform the life cycle assessment, a life cycle inventory was compiled based on the observation and measurement of odontectomy procedures carried out at the dental clinic of George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science, and Technology of Târgu Mureș, Romania. The analysis was carried out using the OpenLCA 2.5 software and the ReCiPe 2016 v1.03 midpoint and endpoint impact categories. Results: Odontectomy of intraosseous impacted teeth had higher environmental impact values than submucosal procedures across all midpoint categories examined. The climate change (GWP) results were 1.43 kg CO₂-eq (submucosal) and 1.56 kg CO₂-eq (intraosseous) in the average-case scenario, while in the worst-case scenario these values increased to 2.21 and 2.35 kg CO₂-eq, respectively. The overall DALY value was also higher in the intraosseous group. Single-use materials contributed the most to the majority of impact categories, while the contribution of reusable instruments was also noticeably higher in intraosseous procedures. Conclusions: A comparison of the two surgical procedures indicates that the environmental burden is primarily associated with the complexity of the procedure and the associated equipment requirements. Integrating sustainability considerations into clinical protocols could potentially yield significant environmental benefits in oral surgery.

Background/Objectives: Bone grafting is fundamental in oral implantology in order to achieve appropriate aesthetic and functional results. One of the options for bone grafting is the use of allografts, which can be produced using femoral heads removed during orthopedic surgeries in accordance with the principles of the circular economy. The aim of this study was to examine the environmental impacts of the production of cancellous block and granulates bone graft materials produced in this way. Methods: The cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment was performed at the Petz Aladár University Teaching Hospital Tissue Bank Department, Győr, Hungary, with the system boundaries defined and the bone graft material produced during a production process defined as a functional unit. The environmental impacts were determined with the OpenLCA software, using the ReCiPe v1.03 2016 midpoint (H) and endpoint (H) assessment methods. Results: During the production process, 500g of bone graft material is produced in both forms, packaged as 1g. The carbon footprint of the production of the cancellous bone block was 75.754 kgCO2-Eq, while that of the bone granulates was 90.363 kgCO2-Eq, to which the chemicals used for degreasing and deantigenization of the bone tissue contributed the most. Within the impact categories, the material resource of metals-minerals, terrestrial ecotoxicity and climate change contributed the most to the environmental impacts. Within most impact categories, electricity was the most significant influencing factor. Conclusions: The environmental impact of the production of bone substitute granulates is greater than that of the bone block, to which the packaging of the products contributes primarily.