Background: The most prevalent gynecological cancer is endometrial carcinoma. Research has demonstrated that laparoscopic total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and dissection of pelvic lymph nodes were superior to laparotomy in terms of shorter hospital stays and lower intraoperative blood loss. Objective: The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the oncological and surgical outcomes of total laparoscopic versus open abdominal hysterectomy for the treatment of early endometrial carcinoma. It also sought to report on overall survival rates and long-term recurrence. Methods: Data of sixty patients who underwent hysterectomy for early endometrial cancer was obtained. They were split into two comparable groups: thirty patients underwent open abdominal hysterectomy treatment in the first group (Group 1), and thirty patients underwent laparoscopic surgery in the second group (Group 2). Results: The laparoscopy group had a mean operation time that was longer than the laparotomy group, and this difference was statistically significant (p< 0.001). Patients treated with laparotomy had considerably higher rates of postoperative surgical site infection (p < 0.007) than patients treated with laparoscopic surgery. More favorable outcomes from laparoscopic surgery included shorter hospital stays (p < 0.001). Each group had the same rate of recurrence. The disease-free interval and overall survival did not differ statistically significantly between the two groups. Conclusions: When it comes to managing early endometrial carcinoma, laparoscopic hysterectomy is a reliable and safe option to laparotomy. It offers far superior surgical outcomes and less postoperative complications, even if both methods have results that are almost identical from an oncological standpoint.