Timaran and others1 report on what essentially appears to be a registry-based observational study and go at length to explain why their results may be used to refute the results of the EVAR (endovascular aortic aneurysm repair) 2 trial.2 They recognize the fact that by definition their design is inferior but still claim that no patients should be denied “rescue” by a vascular surgeon. Interestingly,
framing the message as denying care instead of what more appropriately may be called offering optimal medical care already sets the scene.