BACKGROUND: The consequences of maxillofacial injuries are functionals and aesthetics. The initial treatment must lead to consolidation without any sequelae (complete healing with no clinical symptoms). 3D printing is increasingly used in maxillofacial surgery, but data on its use in the initial phase of trauma is scarce. METHOD: We conducted a bibliographic search in PubMed’s electronic database with the following terms: maxillofacial traumatology, maxillofacial fracture, mandible fracture, maxillary fracture, zygoma fracture, LeFort fracture, fracture of the naso-ethmoido-maxillo-fronto-orbital complex, orbital fracture, nasal bones fracture, frontal sinus fracture, 3D printing, 3-dimensional printing, virtual planning. Data included study characteristics, material used, evaluation criteria, advantages, and disadvantages of the use of 3D printing. RESULTS: Fifty-six articles were selected and divided into 3 groups (multiple facial fractures, mandible fractures, and zygoma and/or orbital wall fractures). There were mainly retrospective studies and case reports, and the authors used CT scans to plan surgery. Printed objects were occlusal splints ( = 11 from fractures with occlusal disorders), and a skull model with fracture or after virtual reduction ( = 42). 3D printing permits a reduction in operating time from 15 to 60 min. The authors often used them to preshape plates, and the evaluation criteria were essentially radiologic (position of the implant compared to planning, precision of the reduction, orbital volume, etc.). CONCLUSION: The use of 3D printing permits reduced operating times and better visibility of movements. However, this often requires a post-operative CT scan, and little account is taken of clinical criteria. 3D printing and acute maxillofacial trauma: an overview of the literature.