Endovascular repair (EVAR) has produced increasing interest in the treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs). Experiences to support EVAR as first approach for patients with rAAA is drawn from three sources: results of single-centre series, systematic reviews, and population-based studies. In order to validate EVAR, this technique was compared to open repair (OR), considered as the conventional treatment. These studies are heterogeneous, and often failed to demonstrate any significant difference between EVAR and OR. More recently, some population-based studies from the USA suggested advantages of EVAR over OR with regard to 30-day mortality and morbidity. Some bias have influenced the reported
Results: Criteria for choice of EVAR varied across the studies according to the policy of the authors. Therefore, any meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution. Patients' conditions have directed the authors towards a technique instead of the other, i.e. pathophysiological factors of the patients, and anatomical conditions of the AAAs. Availability of the required endovascular equipment and trained staff allows EVAR and not always were present. Currently, according to the literature the role of EVAR in the management of rAAAs must to be further checked. Randomized trials could provide the evidence to define adequate indication to EVAR. EVAR could play an important role in the treatment of rAAAs, providing adequate selection of cases suitable for this technique.