Fusion robot-assisted thoracic surgery (fusion RATS) has gained much attention as an alternative to console-only approaches (pure RATS), as during fusion RATS, the bedside assistant performs stapling and actively supports the procedure. This study retrospectively analyzed data from 553 patients who underwent robotic anatomical pulmonary resection with either fusion or pure RATS to compare perioperative outcomes. After 1:2 propensity score matching, 294 patients were included in the analysis. Fusion RATS exhibited substantially shorter operative and console times without an increase in complication rates. Moreover, it allowed for flexible stapler insertion angles, enabling the use of reinforced staplers. Assistant participation in key steps may provide educational benefits and improve adaptability, specifically when integrated robotic staplers are unavailable. Fusion RATS proved to be a practical and safe alternative with additional technical and educational advantages, supporting its broader adoption in thoracic surgery.