ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness and safety of electromagnetic navigation-guided localization and CT-guided percutaneous localization for pulmonary nodules.MethodsThe literature published from the inception to January 2021 about the comparison between electromagnetic navigation-guided localization and CT-guided percutaneous localization for pulmonary nodules in the PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EMbase, Chinese Wanfang database and CNKI database was searched. RevMan (version 5.4) software was used for meta-analysis. Nonrandomized controlled trials were evaluated using methodological index for nonrandomized studies (MINORS).ResultsA total of six retrospective studies (567 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. MINORS scores of all studies were all 17 points and above. There were 317 patients in the CT-guided percutaneous localization group and 250 patients in the electromagnetic navigation-guided localization group. The complication rate of the CT-guided percutaneous localization group was significantly higher than that in the electromagnetic navigation-guided localization group (OR=11.08, 95%CI 3.35 to 36.65, P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the success rate of localization (OR=0.48, 95%CI 0.16 to 1.48, P=0.20), localization time (MD=0.30, 95%CI –6.16 to 6.77, P=0.93) or nodule diameter (MD=–0.07, 95%CI –0.19 to 0.06, P=0.29) between the two groups.ConclusionElectromagnetic navigation can be used as an effective preoperative positioning method for pulmonary nodules, which has the advantage of lower complication rate compared with the traditional CT positioning method.