Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of radical surgery with radiotherapy in patients with early-stage cervical carcinoma. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were systematically reviewed, and studies comparing radical surgery with radiotherapy were included. The main efficacy outcomes included overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Safety endpoints were adverse events. Hazard ratios (HR) or risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI were used to pool the estimates. Results: A total of 6 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Radical surgery was associated with comparable survival effects in OS (HR = 0.73; 95% CI 0.46-1.17; p = 0.196) and DFS (HR = 0.84; 95% CI 0.64-1.10; p = 0.207) as compared with radiotherapy. Moreover, positive lymphangiography (HR = 3.67; 95% CI 2.86-4.70; p < 0.001), adeno-carcinomatous histotype (HR = 2.53; 95% CI 1.80-3.56; p < 0.001), adenosquamous histotype (HR = 1.55; 95% CI 1.27-1.89; p < 0.001), tumor size >= 4 cm (HR = 1.60; 95% CI 1.14-2.23; p < 0.001), stage IB2 (HR = 1.71; 95% CI 1.43-2.04; p < 0.001), and stage IIA (HR = 1.85; 95% CI 1.54-2.22; p < 0.001) were all independent predictors of decreased survival. Patients treated with radical surgery had a rate of adverse events similar to that of those treated with radiotherapy (RR = 1.23; 95% CI 0.61-2.48; p = 0.557). Conclusion: The present study suggested that radical surgery and radiotherapy offered similarly effective treatment in terms of OS and DFS in early-stage cervical carcinoma. Moreover, the complication rate between the 2 treatments was not significantly different. Considering the potential limitations of this study, more large-scale well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to verify our findings.