To assess the efficacy of all forms of ropivacaine administration for the management of pain and opioid use, specifically in patients undergoing laparoscopichysterectomy. We searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and SCOPUS for relevant clinical trials matching our eligibility criteria.Outcomes of interest included: Pain intensity (measured either by visual analog scale score or by numerical rating scale score), QoR-40 score (Overallquality of recovery tool, designed to measure physical comfort, physical independence, pain, emotional status, and need for support), and the need foropioid rescue. We performed the analysis under the fixed-effects model for homogeneous data and random-effects model for heterogeneous data. Mostheterogeneous data were solved by the leave-one-out method, in cases where this was not successful, we then proceeded to conduct at least one subgroupmeta-analysis in an attempt to solve heterogeneity. We assessed the risk of bias using Cochrane’s risk of bias tool. A total of five clinical trials were included.Regarding the pain score, there was no significant difference between either group [standardized mean difference=-0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI):(-0.56, 0.23); p=0.41]. The analysis of the overall RoQ40 scores favored the ropivacaine group over the control group significantly [mean difference(MD)=17.68, 95% CI: (1.48, 33.87); p<0.001]. Regarding the use of opioids, the analysis revealed no significant difference between either group [MD=-2.57, 95% CI: (-6.62, 1.49); p=0.21].Ropivacaine administration by any method does not seem to be effective in reducing pain or reducing the need for opioid use after laparoscopic hysterectomyprocedures; however, the administration did show a significant improvement in the patient’s “overall quality of recovery,” as measured using the QoR-40tool.