To assess the feasibility of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) on patients presenting with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in a teaching hospital, and to compare there post-operative outcomes with contemporaneous patients treated with open repair (OR). A series of consecutive of patients presenting ruptured AAA with retro/intraperitoneal haematoma were included in the study. EVAR was attempted whenever possible. In all other cases (severe haemodynamic instability, adverse anatomy, device unavailability), ruptured AAA were treated by OR. Thirty-seven patients were enrolled between January 2001 and July 2004. Seventeen (46%) patients were treated using adapted designed aortoiliac endografts (eight bifurcated, eight aorto-uniiliac, one iliac extension). Twenty (54%) patients unfit for EVAR because of severe haemodynamic instability (n=8), adverse anatomical configuration (n=7), or unavailability of an appropriate endograft (n=5) were treated by OR. Twenty-seven (73%) had a retrospective suitable anatomy for EVAR. Three early conversions from EVAR to OR were performed. Blood loss, operating time, and intensive care stay were significantly decreased in EVAR patients (respectively: 156 min+/-60, 1520 ml+/-1175, 3 days for EVAR; vs. 222 min+/-82, 3075 ml+/-1750, 13 days for OS; P<.01). The 30-day mortality rate was 23.5% for EVAR vs. 50% for OR (P=0.09). EVAR of ruptured AAA is feasible for selected patients based on haemodynamic and morphologic criteria, and should be associated with improved immediate outcomes as compared with OR. These results should be tempered by the fact that these patients have heavy comorbidities which explains the absence of difference in mid-term mortality rates between the two groups, but should also encourage surgical institutions that are managing such life-threatening emergencies to introduce EVAR as part of their therapeutic arsenal for ruptured AAA.