<p>To investigate the current evidence in post-operative outcomes to support the use of Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic (radical) Prostatectomy (RALP) over Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy (LRP) in cases of organ-confined prostate cancer. A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA/MOOSE guidelines. Dichotomous variables were pooled as risk ratios (RR). Continuous variables were pooled as weighted mean differences (WMD). Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa score (NOS). Four suitable randomised controlled studies were identified from the literature. 1026 male patients with prostate cancer (LRP <i>n</i> = 342, 33.33%; RALP <i>n</i> = 684, 66.67%) were identified as eligible for inclusion. These patients were randomised for definitive operative management to RALP or LRP. There was no statistically significant difference identified in operative time (MD -2.81, 95% CI -12.92–7.31, I² = 77%, <i>P</i> = 0.59). There was no statistically significant difference identified in operative blood-loss (MD -9.34, 95% CI -55.81 + 37.12, I² = 77%, <i>P</i> = 0.69). There was no statistically significant difference identified in biochemical recurrence free rates at 12 months. Statistically significant differences were identified in meta-analysis of post-operative urinary continence, and post-operative potency. These favoured RALP over LRP. No statistically significant difference was identified in operative time, operative blood-loss, or biochemical recurrence free rates at 12 months. There is an statistically significant improved post-operative profile of patients having undergone RALP v LRP, in particular with respect to return of sexual function and urinary continence. There was no statistical difference identified in intra-operative blood-loss, perioperative complications, or operative time.</p>