ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of bone reconstruction and lengthening compared to amputation in the treatment of tibial hemimelia for patients and their families. Methods: Systematic review of articles published in English and Portuguese between 1982 and 2022 in the MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane and SciELO databases. The variables of interest were: year of publication, sample characteristics, classification of tibial hemimelia according to Jones, treatment outcome and follow-up time. Results: A total of eleven articles were included in the scope of this review. The studies involved 131 patients, 53.4% male and 46.6% female. The age of the patients who underwent a surgical procedure ranged from 1 year and 10 months to 15 years. The most common type was Jones’ I (40.9%). The most recurrent complications in the reconstruction treatment were: infection of the external fixator path, flexion contracture (mainly of the knee), reduction in the range of motion of the knee and ankle. Conclusion: We did not find enough relevant studies in the literature to prove the superiority of reconstruction. Amputation remains the gold standard treatment for tibial hemimelia to this day. Level of Evidence III, systematic review of level III studies