Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with single-vessel disease of the left anterior descending artery (LAD). Methods Databases including The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2015), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were searched electronically from inception to Oct. 2015, to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about MIDCAB versus PCI for single-vessel disease of the LAD. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. Results A total of 10 RCTs including 1?489 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with the PCI group, the MIDCAB group could significantly reduce the incidence of postoperative target vessel revascularization (OR=0.20，95%CI 0.13 to 2.29，P < 0.000?01), and the incidence of main adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (OR=0.44, 95%CI 0.33 to 0.58, P < 0.000?01). No significant differences were found between the two groups in total case mortality (OR=1.23, 95%CI 0.83 to 1.83, P=0.31), cardiogenic death (OR=1.12, 95%CI 0.59 to 2.12, P=0.73), and the incidence of postoperative myocardial infarction (OR=2.16, 95%CI 0.83 to 5.59, P=0.11). Conclusion In reducing the incidences of postoperative target vessels again revascularization and MACCE of patients with single-vessel disease of the LAD, MIDCAB is superior to PCI. Due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusion still needs to be verified by carrying out more high-quality RCTs.