Background: Laparoscopic surgeries become the gold standard procedure of management of many elective surgical problems, but its role in acute emergent surgical problems as in perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) management has been still controversial and needs further evaluation. The aim of the present study was to compare between laparoscopic repair and open repair for the surgical management of PPU to give an evidence-based clue for selecting most appropriate surgical management technique. Patients and Methods: in the current study we included 30 patients which were divided into 2 groups; group 1 included 15 patients where we managed them by laparoscopic simple closure of the perforation with an omental patch and group 2 included 15 patients where we performed simple closure of the perforation with an omental patch through open surgery. Results: There is statistically significant association between both groups regarding duration of hospital stay (days), presence of surgical site infection, postoperative morbidity (p<0.001), postoperative mortality (p= 0.009) (more in the open group), clinical cure without complication (less in the open group) (p=0.002). Conclusions: Our study clarified the benefits of laparoscopic repair of PPU than open surgical repair of PPU regarding less postoperative pain, infection, morbidities, mortality and shorter duration of hospitalization in comparison with open repai