Comparative Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches on Patient Recovery: A Systematic Review

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has reshaped modern operative care by reducing tissue trauma and accelerating recovery compared with open procedures. Despite extensive research, inconsistencies remain across specialties regarding recovery outcomes and comparative effectiveness, and open surgery remains necessary in selected complex cases where minimally invasive access may be unsuitable or unsafe. This systematic review aimed to evaluate and compare patient recovery following minimally invasive and open surgical approaches. A structured search was conducted across major databases for studies published between 2015 and May 2026, including randomized and observational comparative designs. Data were extracted using a standardized approach and synthesized narratively due to heterogeneity in study designs, surgical procedures, and outcome reporting. Key outcomes included length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, complication rates, operative time, and functional recovery. Findings indicated shorter hospital stay, reduced postoperative pain, and faster recovery in minimally invasive groups, while operative time and cost varied across procedures. Complication profiles favored minimally invasive approaches in many procedures, although differences were procedure-specific. Robotic-assisted approaches did not demonstrate uniform recovery superiority over conventional laparoscopic techniques. MIS enhances short-term recovery and supports improved patient outcomes and healthcare efficiency when applied to appropriate patients and procedures. Conventional open surgery continues to have an important role in technically demanding, advanced, or anatomically complex procedures. Further research should address long-term outcomes, cost-effectiveness, complication-specific endpoints, and technological integration to strengthen evidence-based clinical decision-making across diverse surgical populations and settings.