Objective To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety for video-assisted anal fistula therapy in the treatment of complex anal fistula. Methods The databases of CKNI, Wanfang, VIP, CBM, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase were retrieved from the time of database establishment to may 31 2022. The two researchers independently screened the literatures and evaluated the quality of the literatures that met the inclusion criteria according to the research purpose and quality evaluation criteria. Meta-analysis were performed with the Revman 5.4.1 software. Results A total of 11 articles and 977 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that the video-assisted group were superior to the traditional incision and thread hanging operation group in improved the cure rate [RR=1.14, 95%CI (1.04, 1.24), P<0.05], accelerated wound healing [MD=–10.40, 95%CI (–13.64, –7.17), P<0.05], protected the anal function after surgery [MD=–1.32, 95%CI (–1.85, –0.79), P＜0.05], relieved postoperative 24-hour pain [MD=–1.23, 95%CI (–1.60, –0.86), P＜0.05], shorten the operative time and hospital stay [MD=–9.46, 95%CI (–17.16, –1.75), P<0.05; MD=–3.87, 95%CI (–5.90, –1.84), P<0.05], reduced intraoperative bleeding [MD=–14.24, 95%CI (–17.49, –10.99), P<0.05] and the incidence of postoperative complications [RR=0.39, 95%CI (0.27, 0.56), P<0.05], which difference were statistically significant. However, there was no significant difference in the recurrence rate of 1-year after operation [OR=0.64, 95%CI (0.33, 1.23), P>0.05]. Conclusions Video-assisted anal fistula treatment is a safe and effective sphincter preserving operation for the treatment of complex anal fistula, which is superior to the traditional incision and thread hanging operation. However, due to the limitations and publication bias of the included literature, more prospective, large sample, multi center randomized controlled trial are needed to confirm its long-term efficacy.