A best evidence topic in thoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: is limited pulmonary resection equivalent to lobectomy in terms of morbidity, long-term survival and locoregional recurrence in patients with stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)? A total of 166 papers were found using the reported search; of which, 16 papers, including one meta-analysis and one randomized control trial (RCT), represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. With regards to 5-year survival rates, the evidence is conflicting: a 2005 meta-analysis and six other retrospective or prospective nonrandomized analyses did not find any statistically significant difference when comparing lobectomy with limited resection. However, three studies found evidence of a decreased overall survival with limited resection, including the only randomized control trial, which showed a 50% increase in the cancer-related death rate (P = 0.09), and a 30% increase in the overall death rate in patients undergoing limited resection (P = 0.08). Age, tumour size and specific type of limited resection were also factors influencing the survival rates. Four studies, including the RCT, found increased locoregional recurrence rates with limited resection. There is also evidence that wedge resections, compared with segmentectomies, lead to lower survival and higher recurrence rates. In conclusion, lobectomy is still recommended for younger patients with adequate cardiopulmonary function. Although limited resection carries a decreased rate of complications and shorter hospital stays, it may also carry a higher rate of loco-regional recurrences. However, limited resection may be comparable for patients >71 years of age, and those with small peripheral tumours.