<p>Robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative to open kidney transplantation (OKT). However, the comparative benefits and limitations of both approaches remain unclear. To compare the outcomes of RAKT and OKT through an umbrella review of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses. This umbrella review was written following PRISMA guidelines. Only meta-analysis and systematic review were included. Many outcomes were studied such as warm (WIT) and cold ischemia times (CIT), rewarming time, total ischemia time, blood loss, blood transfusion, delayed graft function, surgical site infections (SSI), hospital stay, graft rejection, graft failure, all-cause mortality, operation time, incision length, hospital readmission, vascular and ureteral anastomosis time, and other complications. We assessed methodological quality via the AMSTAR-2 tool. Consistency and strength of evidence were also evaluated. 6 studies were included: four meta-analyses and two systematic reviews. Studies were of low to moderate quality. Robotic kidney transplant surgery yields better outcomes in terms of blood loss (MDs ranging from − 16 to − 55 mL across studies), post-operative pain, incision length, SSI and ureteral leak. On the other hand, CIT, rewarming time, total ischemia time, operative time and ileus rate were favored in open surgery. Same rejection rates, graft failure, mortality and hospital readmission rate were found between both techniques. RAKT appears to improve several perioperative outcomes while maintaining comparable graft and patient survival outcomes to OKT. However, the available evidence remains limited by the low-to-moderate quality of existing reviews, highlighting the need for high-quality prospective studies.</p>