Gabriel Baron

Bio: Gabriel Baron is an academic researcher from Paris Descartes University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Population & Randomized controlled trial. The author has an hindex of 52, co-authored 138 publications receiving 14898 citations. Previous affiliations of Gabriel Baron include University of Paris-Sud & Sorbonne.

A prospective survey of patients with valvular heart disease in Europe : The Euro Heart Survey on Valvular Heart Disease.

Abstract: To identify the characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of contemporary patients with valvular heart disease (VHD) in Europe, and to examine adherence to guidelines.

Decision-making in elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis: why are so many denied surgery?

Abstract: Aims To analyse decision-making in elderly patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). Methods and results In the Euro Heart Survey on valvular heart disease, 216 patients aged ≥75 had severe AS (valve area ≤0.6 cm2/m2 body surface area or mean gradient ≥50 mmHg) and angina or New York Heart Association class III or IV. Patient characteristics were analysed according to the decision to operate or not. A decision not to operate was taken in 72 patients (33%). In multivariable analysis, left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction [OR=2.27, 95% CI (1.32–3.97) for ejection fraction 30–50, OR=5.15, 95% CI (1.73–15.35) for ejection fraction ≤30 vs. >50%, P =0.003] and age [OR=1.84, 95% CI (1.18–2.89) for 80–85 years, OR=3.38, 95% CI (1.38–8.27) for ≥85 vs. 75–80 years, P =0.008] were significantly associated with the decision not to operate; however, the Charlson comorbidity index was not [OR=1.72, 95% CI (0.83–3.50), P =0.14 for index ≥2 vs. <2]. Neurological dysfunction was the only comorbidity significantly linked with the decision not to operate. Conclusion Surgery was denied in 33% of elderly patients with severe, symptomatic AS. Older age and LV dysfunction were the most striking characteristics of patients who were denied surgery, whereas comorbidity played a less important role.

Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvement

Abstract: Background: In clinical trials, at the group level, results are usually reported as mean and standard deviation of the change in score, which is not meaningful for most readers. Objective: To determine the minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) of pain, patient’s global assessment of disease activity, and functional impairment in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA). Methods: A prospective multicentre 4 week cohort study involving 1362 outpatients with knee or hip OA was carried out. Data on assessment of pain and patient’s global assessment, measured on visual analogue scales, and functional impairment, measured on the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) function subscale, were collected at baseline and final visits. Patients assessed their response to treatment on a five point Likert scale at the final visit. An anchoring method based on the patient’s opinion was used. The MCII was estimated in a subgroup of 814 patients (603 with knee OA, 211 with hip OA). Results: For knee and hip OA, MCII for absolute (and relative) changes were, respectively, ( a ) −19.9 mm (−40.8%) and −15.3 mm (−32.0%) for pain; ( b ) −18.3 mm (–39.0%) and −15.2 mm (−32.6%) for patient’s global assessment; ( c ) −9.1 (−26.0%) and −7.9 (−21.1%) for WOMAC function subscale score. The MCII is affected by the initial degree of severity of the symptoms but not by age, disease duration, or sex. Conclusion: Using criteria such as MCII in clinical trials would provide meaningful information which would help in interpreting the results by expressing them as a proportion of improved patients.

What are the characteristics of patients with severe, symptomatic, mitral regurgitation who are denied surgery?

Abstract: Aim To identify the proportion and characteristics of patients with severe symptomatic mitral regurgita tion (MR) who are denied surgery. Methods and results In the Euro Heart Survey on valvular heart disease, 396 patients had severe symptomatic MR as assessed by Doppler-echocardiography (grade >= 3/4) and New York Heart Association class 11 or greater. Patient characteristics were analysed according to the decision to operate or not. A decision not to operate was taken in 193 patients (49%). In multivariable analysis, decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) [OR= 1.39 per 10% decrease, 95% CI (1.17-1.66), P = 0.0002], non-ischaemic aetiology [OR = 4.44, 95% CI (1.96-10.76), P = 0.0006], older age [OR = 1.40 per 10-year increase, 95% CI(1.15-1.72), P=0.001], increased Charlson comorbidity index [OR= 1.38 per 1 point increase, 95% CI (1.12-1.72), P = 0.004], and grade 3 MR [OR = 2.23, 95% CI (1.28-3.29), P = 0.005] were associated with the decision not to operate. One-year survival was 96.0 +/- 1.4% in patients with a positive decision for intervention vs. 89.5 +/- 2.3% in those with a negative decision (P = 0.02). Conclusion Surgery was denied in 49% of patients with severe symptomatic MR. Impaired LVEF, older age, and comorbidity were the most striking characteristics of patients who were denied surgery. The weight of age and LVEF in the decision do not seem justified according to current knowledge.

EULAR Sjögren's syndrome disease activity index: development of a consensus systemic disease activity index for primary Sjögren's syndrome

Abstract: Objective To develop a disease activity index for patients with primary Sjogren9s syndrome (SS): the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Sjogren9s syndrome disease activity index (ESSDAI). Methods Thirty-nine SS experts participated in an international collaboration, promoted by EULAR, to develop the ESSDAI. Experts identified 12 organ-specific ‘domains’ contributing to disease activity. For each domain, features of disease activity were classified in three or four levels according to their severity. Data abstracted from 96 patients with systemic complications of primary SS were used to generate 702 realistic vignettes for which all possible systemic complications were represented. Using the 0–10 physician global assessment (PhGA) scale, each expert scored the disease activity of five patient profiles and 20 realistic vignettes. Multiple regression modelling, with PhGA used as the dependent variable, was used to estimate the weight of each domain. Results All 12 domains were significantly associated with disease activity in the multivariate model, domain weights ranged from 1 to 6. The ESSDAI scores varied from 2 to 47 and were significantly correlated with PhGA for both real patient profiles and realistic vignettes (r=0.61 and r=0.58, respectively, p Conclusions The ESSDAI is a clinical index designed to measure disease activity in patients with primary SS. Once validated, such a standardised evaluation of primary SS should facilitate clinical research and be helpful as an outcome measure in clinical trials.

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

Abstract: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.

ACC/AHA 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease

Abstract: PREAMBLE......e4 APPENDIX 1......e121 APPENDIX 2......e122 APPENDIX 3......e124 REFERENCES......e124 It is important that the medical profession play a significant role in critically evaluating the use of diagnostic procedures and therapies as they are introduced in the detection, management,

Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation for Aortic Stenosis in Patients Who Cannot Undergo Surgery

Abstract: Background Many patients with severe aortic stenosis and coexisting conditions are not candi dates for surgical replacement of the aortic valve. Recently, transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) has been suggested as a less invasive treatment for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Methods We randomly assigned patients with severe aortic stenosis, whom surgeons considered not to be suitable candidates for surgery, to standard therapy (including balloon aortic valvuloplasty) or transfemoral transcatheter implantation of a balloon-expandable bovine pericardial valve. The primary end point was the rate of death from any cause. Results A total of 358 patients with aortic stenosis who were not considered to be suitable candidates for surgery underwent randomization at 21 centers (17 in the United States). At 1 year, the rate of death from any cause (Kaplan–Meier analysis) was 30.7% with TAVI, as compared with 50.7% with standard therapy (hazard ratio with TAVI, 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 0.74; P<0.001). The rate of the composite end point of death from any cause or repeat hospitalization was 42.5% with TAVI as com pared with 71.6% with standard therapy (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.59; P<0.001). Among survivors at 1 year, the rate of cardiac symptoms (New York Heart Association class III or IV) was lower among patients who had undergone TAVI than among those who had received standard therapy (25.2% vs. 58.0%, P<0.001). At 30 days, TAVI, as compared with standard therapy, was associated with a higher incidence of major strokes (5.0% vs. 1.1%, P = 0.06) and major vascular complications (16.2% vs. 1.1%, P<0.001). In the year after TAVI, there was no deterioration in the functioning of the bioprosthetic valve, as assessed by evidence of stenosis or regurgitation on an echocardiogram. Conclusions In patients with severe aortic stenosis who were not suitable candidates for surgery, TAVI, as compared with standard therapy, significantly reduced the rates of death from any cause, the composite end point of death from any cause or repeat hospitalization, and cardiac symptoms, despite the higher incidence of major strokes and major vascular events. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00530894.)

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2010 Update A Report From the American Heart Association

Abstract: Appendix I: List of Statistical Fact Sheets. URL: http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=2007 We wish to thank Drs Brian Eigel and Michael Wolz for their valuable comments and contributions. We would like to acknowledge Tim Anderson and Tom Schneider for their editorial contributions and Karen Modesitt for her administrative assistance. Disclosures View this table: View this table: View this table: # Summary {#article-title-2} Each year, the American Heart Association, in conjunction with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and other government agencies, brings together the most up-to-date statistics on heart disease, stroke, other vascular diseases, and their risk factors and presents them in its Heart Disease and Stroke Statistical Update. The Statistical Update is a valuable resource for researchers, clinicians, healthcare policy makers, media professionals, the lay public, and many others who seek the best national data available on disease …

CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

Abstract: Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.