Objective: This study aimed to systematically compare the short-term outcomes of minimally invasive pancreatic enucleation (MI-pEn), including laparoscopic and robotic-assisted approaches, and open pancreatic enucleation (O-pEn). Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted for studies published between January 1990 and December 2025 that compared various types of pancreatic enucleation. The literature screening, data extraction, and quality assessment followed the PRISMA guidelines. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1 and R 4.3.0. Results: Fifteen studies were included, with thirteen comparative studies (463 MI-pEn, 547 O-pEn) incorporated into the meta-analysis. Two studies comparing laparoscopic and robot-assisted enucleation were also included. No significant difference in clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) was detected between MI-pEn and O-pEn (OR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.56-1.07; p = 0.12). However, MI-pEn was associated with significantly reduced operation time (MD = -21.24; p = 0.01), blood loss (MD = -75.88; p < 0.00001), hospital stay (MD = -2.07; p = 0.001), and wound infection (OR = 0.3; p = 0.03). Direct comparisons between robotic and laparoscopic enucleation revealed no significant differences in any outcomes. Conclusions: MI-pEn is safe and feasible and offers advantages in terms of operative time, blood loss, and recovery without increasing complications. Robotic and laparoscopic approaches yield comparable short-term outcomes in pancreatic enucleation, although the potential advantage of robotic surgery in reducing pancreatic fistula risk warrants further validation.