Perforation of peptic ulcer is a surgical emergency which still carries a risk of mortality. The main risk factors are delayed diagnosis > 24 hours, ASA-III or ASA-IV, age over 70 years, and associated cardiorespiratory pathologies. There is no unanimous consensus regarding the gold standard treatment of such complications. In this study we report our experience and analyse the literature with the aim of assessing the possible advantages of laparoscopic treatment of perforated duodenal ulcers versus open surgery. From April 2003 to December 2008, 39 patients underwent laparoscopic repair and 7 patients open repair of perforated duodenal ulcer. The following parameters were evaluated in all patients: operative time, duration of hospital stay, time to intestinal canalisation, morbidity and mortality. The conversion rate, in laparoscopic treated patients, was 0%. The mean operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (76.15 +/- 9.49 vs. 63.57 +/- 15.19 minutes; Mann Whitney test p < 0.05). The laparoscopic cases had a shorter mean hospital stay than the open cases (5.8 +/- 1.02 vs. 7.8 +/-1.34 days; Mann Whitney test p < 0.001). The time to canalisation in the two groups of patients was similar. One patient (2.56%) in the laparoscopic group and two (28.57%) in the open repair group presented morbidity in the postoperative period. One patient (ASA IV) in the open group died. Laparoscopic treatment in the emergency setting is a safe, reliable procedure, affording all the advantages of the minimally invasive approach.