Twenty two published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving a total of 3286 patients was suitable for inclusion in the present meta-analysis. This meta-analysis carried out to compare the results of minimally invasive discectomy(MID) with that of standard open dicectomy(OD) in treatment of lumber disc prolapsed (LDP) regarding perioperative complications(blood loss, dural tear, nerve root injury, wound infection and recurrent disc herniation),operative duration, hospital stay and postoperative pain(VAS score for leg and back pain). At first we discussed the following: Review of literature including the relevant anatomy and biomechanics of the lumbar spine followed by the pathogenesis and management of lumber disc prolapse. Evidence based medicine (EBM) in the spine surgery including its definition, importance, steps and level of evidence. Systematic review and Meta-analysis including their definitions, the methodology behind systematic review and how to do meta-analysis research. Also, description of forest plot in meta-analysis and definition of relative risk value .Where can we find systematic review to collect data for meta-analysis. Then we discussed the meta-analysis that comparing the results of open versus minimally invasive discectomy in treatment of LDP as the following: literature search and publication selection according to the inclusion criteria. appraisal of the studies for validity , relevance and results of surgical interventions (OD and MID) Data extraction from studies; number of patients, age of patients, follow up time, complications and VAS score for leg and back pain with (comprehensive meta-analysis version3.0) statistical analysis to data was done. And lastly, from the results of statistical analysis of the pooled collected data from the appraised RCTs we concluded that; the evidence from this meta-analysis suggests that the overall balance between the results of OD versus MID for surgical treatment of lumber disc prolapse currently may favor MID regarding blood loss, hospital stay and long term follow up VAS leg pain score. On the other hand, it may favor OD regarding operative time and dural tear. But, there is no significant difference between OD and MID regarding intra-operative nerve root injury, post-operative wound infection, long term follow up VAS back pain score and recurrent disc herniation.