Background: Across the world, many populations have limited access to urology care resulting in local general surgeons performing emergency urology procedures. This systematic review aims to evaluate the nature and outcomes of emergency urological surgeries performed by general surgeons. Methods: A systematic review was undertaken according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines with MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar searched from inception to June 2024 for studies where general surgeons performed emergent urological surgery. We excluded studies on paediatric urology, acute scrotum, and Fournier’s gangrene. The Downs and Black checklist was used to assess risk of bias. Results: From 2093 initial results, six studies were included after screening. Two studies were from Australia, two from the United States of America, and one each from India and South Africa. For 977 emergency urological interventions, general surgeons (n = 486) and urologists (n = 491) each performed approximately half of the surgeries. Mortality rates for general surgeon-performed urology ranged from 0 to 8.0%. One study compared outcomes between the two surgical specialties, showing no significant difference for mortality or complication rates. No follow-up data was reported. The most performed procedures by general surgeons were traumatic bladder repair, ureteric stent insertion, and percutaneous nephrostomy. Conclusions: General surgeons perform a wide spectrum of emergency urological surgery when needed. Targeted training and utilisation of general surgeons could improve patient access to emergency urological surgery.