The aim of this study is to prospectively compare the perioperative mortality severe morbidity and the costs of endovascular versus conventional surgical repair of pararenal, supra-renal and type 4 THORACO-abdominal aortic aneurysms.~The primary goal of the study is to demonstrate a significant drop in 30-day mortality and life threatening morbidity in the endovascular arm of the study. Our hypothesis, derived from the literature, that the average 30-days mortality is 3% after endovascular repair and 10% after open surgery justifies the design of a prospective study between endovascular therapy (250 patients (amendment) treated in 8 University hospitals with significant experience of the technique) and open repair (660 similar patients analyzed form the national database of the MOH).~In-hospital morbidity are similarly expected to be lower in the endovascular group. We also wish to demonstrate that endovascular repair does not represent a significant over-cost, as compared to open repair. The cost of the implantable medical device (IMD), of follow-up screening, and of eventual repeated interventions should be compensated by a reduced stay in intensive care unit ICU, and by a reduced in-hospital length of stay.
The aim of this study is to prospectively compare the perioperative mortality severe morbidity and the costs of endovascular versus conventional surgical repair of pararenal, supra-renal and type 4 THORACO-abdominal aortic aneurysms.~The primary goal of the study is to demonstrate a significant drop in 30-day mortality and life threatening morbidity in the endovascular arm of the study. Our hypothesis, derived from the literature, that the average 30-days mortality is 3% after endovascular repair and 10% after open surgery justifies the design of a prospective study between endovascular therapy (250 patients (amendment) treated in 8 University hospitals with significant experience of the technique) and open repair (660 similar patients analyzed form the national database of the MOH).