Retrospective series indicate that robot-assisted approaches to lung cancer resection offer comparable radicality and safety to video-assisted thoracic surgery or open surgery. More intuitive movements, greater flexibility, and high-definition three-dimensional vision overcome limitations of video-assisted thoracic surgery and may encourage wider adoption of robotic surgery for lung cancer, particularly as more early stage cases are diagnosed by screening. High capital and running costs, limited instrument availability, and long operating times are important disadvantages. Entry of competitor companies should drive down costs. Studies are required to assess quality of life, morbidity, oncologic radicality, and cost effectiveness.