There is controversy between conservative and operative treatment of acute achilles tendon rupture. Operative treatment of achilles tendon rupture can be done through both percutaneous and open technique. Open repair of achilles tendon rupture was associated with higher incidence of wound complications while percutaneous repair was associated with higher incidence of tendonre-rupture rate and sural nerve injury. In this study, we aim to assess the functional outcomes of both open and percutaneous repair of acute achilles tendon rupture and the incidence of complications in both repair types. Twenty patients with acute achilles tendon rupture were retrospectively reviewed and evaluated. Ten patients were treated through percutaneous repair and ten patients were treated through open repair. The patients were followed up for at least one year and evaluated at the last follow up visit using Achilles Tendon Rupture Score (ATRS). Complications for each group were recorded. Twenty patients were included in our study. Ten patients were subjected to percutaneous repair and ten patients were subjected to open repair. There were two case of wound infection and one case of delayed skin healing in patients treated with open repair. The Achilles tendon Rupture Score (ATRS) yielded nearly similar results for both groups at the final follow up. There is no difference between open and percutaneous repair of achilles tendon rupture at a long-term follow up. Both groups had equal functional outcomes however the percutaneous repair of achilles tendon was associated with less wound complications than open repair