Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery: a comparative assessment of outcomes, complications, recovery, and cost

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has revolutionized modern surgical practice, reducing trauma, speeding recovery, and improving surgical accuracy. Robot-assisted surgery has emerged as a minimally invasive surgical technique as an alternative to laparoscopic surgery. However, determining which of the two surgical techniques is more effective across different surgical specialties remains a matter of research. This narrative review aimed to compare robotic-assisted surgery with laparoscopic surgery with respect to patient outcomes, complications, recovery time, and cost. Studies published in PubMed and ScienceDirect were used, with a focus on studies published between 2015 and 2025. Also, studies that compared both techniques through various specialties were included. Robot-assisted surgery showed positive results by improving surgical precision, reducing the need for conversion to open surgery, and resulting in fewer complications and faster functional recovery in some procedures. However, laparoscopic surgery showed superior results in lowering surgical costs and ease of access, with shorter operating times than robotic-assisted surgery. Both robotic-assisted surgery and laparoscopic surgery offer advantages that make comparing them difficult. Robotic-assisted surgery was better for complex surgical procedures that required high precision. However, laparoscopic surgery was superior for routine cases requiring shorter operating times. Further research and prospective, high-quality, and multicenter studies are still needed to better define the optimal application of each surgical approach.