Jean-Michel Paradis

Dr. Jean-Michel Paradis


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

16Years (2011-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 December 2016 in American Heart Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ESErnest Spitzer
Ernest Spitzer
NMNicolas M. Van Mieghem
Nicolas M. Van Mieghem
PPPhilippe Pibarot
Philippe Pibarot
RHRebecca T Hahn
Rebecca T Hahn
SKSusheel Kodali
Susheel Kodali
MLMartin B. Leon
Martin B. Leon

26 June 2014 in European Heart Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JPJean-Michel Paradis
Jean-Michel Paradis
JFJustin Fried
Justin Fried
TNTamim Nazif
Tamim Nazif
AKAjay Kirtane
Ajay Kirtane
KHKishore Harjai
Kishore Harjai
SKSusheel Kodali
Susheel Kodali
Aortic valve stenosis is the most common form of valvular heart disease in the elderly population and occurs frequently in conjunction with coronary artery disease. The standard treatment option for patients with these two conditions has been surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting. The arrival of transcatheter aortic valve replacement has considerably shifted the treatment paradigms. Nevertheless, a lot of questions remain unanswered regarding the management of coronary artery disease in the setting of the transcatheter options for severe aortic stenosis. This article includes a comprehensive review of the literature and seeks to describe the actual knowledge on the topic of aortic stenosis and concomitant coronary artery disease.

1 February 2015 in The American Journal of Cardiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
HDHugo DeLarochellière
Hugo DeLarochellière
MUMarina Urena
Marina Urena
Ignacio J. Amat-SantosIgnacio J. Amat-Santos
Ignacio J. Amat-Santos
HRHenrique Ribeiro
Henrique Ribeiro
RARicardo Allende
Ricardo Allende
JRJosep Rodés-Cabau
Josep Rodés-Cabau

1 September 2015 in JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JPJean-Michel Paradis
Jean-Michel Paradis
HMHersh S. Maniar
Hersh S. Maniar
JLJohn M. Lasala
John M. Lasala
SKSusheel Kodali
Susheel Kodali
MWMathew Williams
Mathew Williams
AZAlan Zajarias
Alan Zajarias

1 March 2020 in The American Journal of Cardiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LGLeonardo Guimarães
Leonardo Guimarães
PVPierre Voisine
Pierre Voisine
SMSiamak Mohammadi
Siamak Mohammadi
DKDimitri Kalavrouzioutis
Dimitri Kalavrouzioutis
EDEric Dumont
Eric Dumont
JRJosep Rodés-Cabau
Josep Rodés-Cabau

23 December 2025 in Circulation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JRJosep Rodés-Cabau
Josep Rodés-Cabau
LNLuis Nombela
Luis Nombela
ICIgnacio Cruz-Gonzalez
Ignacio Cruz-Gonzalez
BHBenjamin Hibbert
Benjamin Hibbert
XFXavier Freixa
Xavier Freixa
ESErwan Salaun
Erwan Salaun
BACKGROUND: The optimal antithrombotic treatment after transcatheter left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) remains to be determined. The objective of this trial was to compare anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy for preventing device-related thrombosis (DRT) after LAAC. METHODS: This was a prospective multicenter international randomized trial comparing 2 different antithrombotic strategies for preventing DRT after LAAC in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) or dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT; aspirin+clopidogrel) for 60 days. Patients underwent transesophageal echocardiography at 60 days, and the images were analyzed in a central echocardiography laboratory by experienced echocardiographers blinded to the allocated treatment. The primary outcome was DRT as determined by transesophageal echocardiography 60 days after LAAC in patients receiving the allocated treatment at the time of transesophageal echocardiography (per-protocol analysis). The safety outcome included all-cause mortality, stroke, bleeding, or site-reported DRT within 60 days after LAAC in all randomized patients (intention-to-treat analysis). RESULTS: A total of 510 patients (mean age 77±9 years, 35% women) were included between October 2018 and May 2025, and 253 and 257 patients were randomized to the DOAC and DAPT groups, respectively. Of these, 399 patients underwent transesophageal echocardiography and were receiving the allocated treatment at 60 days after LAAC. The primary outcome occurred in 3 patients (1.5%) in the DOAC group compared with 8 patients (4.1%) in the DAPT group (difference, −2.7% [95% CI, −6.0% to 0.6%]; P =0.110). The safety outcome occurred in 52 patients (22.5%) in the DOAC group compared with 82 patients (34.9%) in the DAPT group (difference, −12.4% [95% CI, −20.6% to −4.2%]; P =0.003), and differences were mainly driven by a lower rate of bleeding events in the DOAC group (44 patients [17.4%] versus 64 patients [24.9%]; difference, −7.5% [95% CI, −14.6% to −0.4%]; P =0.038). CONCLUSIONS: The use of DOACs after LAAC failed to reduce DRT compared with DAPT, but it was associated with an improved safety profile. The results of this study should be interpreted with caution because of statistical power issues related to the narrower-than-expected between-group differences and will need confirmation in future larger studies. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03568890.