Background: As the base of hepatitis B patients has been increasing annually, it has developed into a high incidence source of primary liver cancer worldwide. The fatality rate of liver cancer is still relatively high. Among the many treatment methods, liver resection is the first-line treatment of primary liver cancer. Although precision hepatectomy has achieved rapid development in recent years, the understanding of its efficacy is still not completely clear. This study aimed to analyze and compare the safety and effectiveness of precision hepatectomy and traditional hepatectomy in the treatment of primary liver cancer. Methods: We performed a literature search of the CNKI, Wanfang, Weipu.com, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science databases for studies on precision liver resection (precision group) and traditional liver resection (traditional group) for the treatment of primary liver cancer. Data including the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, postoperative complications, liver function, and survival rate were analyzed using RevMan 5.3 software to compare the differences in the effects of the two surgical procedures. Results: Ten articles were included in the study, involving a total of 1,969 patients, including 1,045 cases in the precision group and 924 cases in the traditional group. Meta-analysis results showed that compared with the traditional group, the precision group had a longer operation time [mean difference (MD) =8.01, P=0.004], and total bilirubin (TBiL; MD =-2.78, P=0.055) was similar. Meanwhile, the precision group exhibited advantages in terms of intraoperative blood loss (MD =-149.37, P=0.000), hospital stay (MD =-5.59, P=0.000), postoperative liver function indexes [aspartate aminotransferase (AST; MD =-11.61, P=0.000) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT; MD =-18.53, P=0.000)], postoperative complication rate [relative risk (RR) =0.51, P=0.000], and 1-year survival rate (RR =1.11, P=0.000). Discussion: The application of precision surgery in the treatment of primary liver cancer can be a safe and effective method. It can minimize intraoperative blood loss, mitigate surgical risk, reduce postoperative complications, improve patient prognosis and quality of life, and provide better short-term curative effect and patient benefits.