Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has provided a safe and effective alternative to the standard open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). It has, however, been associated with a high requirement for secondary interventions. This prompted us to compare the two procedures with regard to secondary interventions and mortalities. The sample size was 278 patients, of whom 156 had undergone the open operation and 122 had undergone EVAR. The perioperative morbidity and mortality, as well as the major and minor secondary intervention rates, were obtained for these patients. The results suggest that there is no significant difference in secondary interventions and mortality between the two groups, despite the EVAR group being at significantly higher risk.