Objectives: To compare the safety and efficacy of thulium laser resection of prostate (ThuRP) and plasmakinetic resection of prostate (PKRP) for benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH), we made this meta-analysis in regard of the two techniques. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure was performed up to October 1, 2015. Outcomes of interest assessing the two techniques included demographic and clinical characteristics, perioperative variables, follow-up data, and complications. Results: Nine eligible trials evaluating ThuRP versus PKRP for BPH were identified, including six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and three retrospective trials. ThuRP was associated with longer operation time (P<.001), shorter hospital stay (P<.001), irrigation (P=.02), and catheterization (P<.001) duration. Estimated blood loss (P=.005) and drop in hemoglobin level (P=.02) were significantly more in PKRP. Except quality of life score (P=.04), which was better in ThuRP, the postoperative data, including international prostate symptom score (P=.44), Qmax (P=.33), postvoid residual urine volume (P=.55), and the complications such as severe bleeding (P=.52), temporary urinary retention (P=.20), temporary urinary incontinence (P=.64), urinary tract infection (P=.83), and urethral stricture (P=.22), did not differ significantly. Conclusion: Our analysis showed that there was no significant difference in terms of efficacy between ThuRP and PKRP. Although ThuRP was associated with longer operation time, it possessed more safe capacity with less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, irrigation, and catheterization duration. More worldwide RCTs with long-term follow-up are still needed to support our conclusion.