Background: The comparisons in both techniques' out-comes, complications, and hospital stay were the study ques-tions in this article. Aim of Study: The study included two arms: Group A: Microscopic sublabial pituitary surgery was done for 18 patients. Group B: Endoscopic surgery was done for 20 patients. Patients and Methods: A retrospective comparative ob-servational trial held at two places. Microscopic sublabial pituitary surgery casesarmed as group A (n=18). While endo-scopic endonasal transsphenoidal pituitary surgery cases were abbreviated as group B (n=20). Statistical analysis: The variables of interest included age, sex, symptomatology, tumor sizes in (cm3), resection, operative time, hospital stay, blood loss, and postoperative complications using Statistical Package of Social Sciences version 25 (Chicago, IL, USA). Categorical data were presented as percentages and compared using the Chi-square t-test. Numerical data were presented as mean and standard deviation and compared by using Student's t-test. A p-value below 0.05 was regarded as statistically significant. Results: The total resection rate in group A was found in 14/18 (77.7%) which is not statistically different from group B 15/20 (75%) with p-value=0.852. As regard operative time, group A had a longer duration in comparison to group B with a slightly significant difference (2.15±0.24 vs. 1.75±0.8 hrs, p=0.049). As regard complications, It has been noticed that postoperative sinusitis/septal problems are higher in group A than group B. Conclusion: Microscopic sublabial pituitary surgery is not superior to the endoscopic approach as regard resectability in the field of purely sellar lesions. However, higher rates of postoperative complications in the naso-septal apparatus may affect patients' quality of life.