Background: Cervical cancer is among the most common gynecological cancers. However, the procedure of radical hysterectomy remains controversial. Objectives: This systematic review and network meta-analysis (registered in PROSPERO: CRD42021231700) aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of five approaches to cervical cancer surgery. Search Strategy: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science database. Selection Criteria: We select high-quality, non-randomized studies for comparisons of clinical outcomes of adult cervical cancer patients treated with radical hysterectomy including at least one estimate of rate of recurrence, and overall (OS) or progression-free (PFS) survival. Data collection and analysis: We extracted the relevant data and conducted a network meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes, specifically, operation time (OT), intraoperative estimated blood loss (EBL), length of hospital stay (LOS), number of resected lymph nodes (RLNs), rate of complications, and the rate of recurrence, OS, and PFS among included patients. Main Results: RRH was associated with the lowest EBL volume and LOS, ORH was associated with the shortest OT. VALRH was associated with the greatest number of RLNs and lowest rate of perioperative complications. VALRH was associated with the highest OS and lowest tumor recurrence rates, while LRH was associated with the highest PFS rate. OS, PFS, and tumor recurrence rates did not differ significantly among five surgical approaches. Conclusion: In summary, current evidence appears to demonstrate the presented approaches to cervical cancer surgery have a comparable efficacy, while MIS is associated with improved rates of surgical complications, and a shorter hospital stay.