ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for early-stage endometrial cancer (EC) from a societal perspective. MethodsA decision-tree model was constructed to conduct cost-utility analysis, simulating the short-term intraoperative to postoperative clinical progression of patients. Primary evaluation metrics included cumulative costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at three times the 2024 per capita gross domestic product (GDP) of China. The sensitivity analyses were performed to assess robustness of the model. ResultsThe base-case analysis revealed that patients in the RALS group gained 0.09 more QALYs at an additional cost of ¥39 079.52 compared to CLS group, the derived ICER was ¥437 157.36/QALYs, exceeding the predefined WTP threshold. The results suggested that RALS does not demonstrate superior cost-effectiveness compared to CLS in the management of early-stage EC. Univariate sensitivity analysis indicated that, when the annual surgical volume per robotic device reaches 809 cases, or the cost of Endowrist consumables per robotic surgery drops below ¥6 568.46, RALS will emerge as a more cost-effective surgical strategy. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed that that RALS becomes more cost-effective when the WTP threshold exceeds ¥402 145.80. Conclusion From a Chinese societal perspective, robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for early-stage endometrial cancer is not cost-effective compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery at the current WTP threshold of three times per capita GDP.