To evaluate the safety and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery using natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) compared with conventional laparoscopic (CL) colorectal surgery in patients with colorectal diseases. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective non-randomized trials and retrospective trials up to September 1, 2018, and used 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), lymph node harvest, surgical site infection (SSI), anastomotic leakage, and intra-abdominal abscess as the main endpoints. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to the different study types RCT and NRCT (non-randomized controlled trial). A sensitivity analysis was carried out to evaluate the reliability of the outcomes. RevMan5.3 software was used for statistical analysis. Fourteen studies were included (two RCTs, seven retrospective trials and five prospective non-randomized trials) involving a total of 1,435 patients. Compared with CL surgery, the NOSE technique resulted in a shorter hospital stay, shorter time to first flatus, less post-operative pain, and fewer SSIs and total perioperative complications. Anastomotic leakage, blood loss, and intra-abdominal abscess did not differ between the two groups, while operation time was longer in the NOSE group. Oncological outcomes such as proximal margin weighted mean difference WMD = 0.47; 95% confidence interval CI -0.49 to 1.42; = 0.34, distal margin (WMD= -0.11; 95% CI -0.66 to 0.45; = 0.70), lymph node harvest (WMD = -0.97; 95% CI -1.97 to 0.03; = 0.06) and 5-year DFS (hazard ratio = 0.84; 95% CI 0.54-1.31; = 0.45) were not different between the NOSE and CL surgery groups. Compared with CL surgery, NOSE may be a safe procedure, and can achieve similar oncological outcomes. Large multicenter RCTs are needed to provide high-level, evidence-based results in NOSE-treated patients and to determine the risk of local recurrence.