Jens Cosedis Nielson  丹麦奥胡斯大学
    <International circulation >: Thank you Professor Nielson for accepting International Circulations interview here in Orlando in 2011 AHA. Yesterday you presented a wonderful trial named MANTRA-PAF. The trial was conducted in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) patients， and the trial showed that the radiofrequency (RF) ablation is superior to that of antiarrhythmic drugs in terms of reducing the AF burden or the occurrence of AF. But that benefit only shows up after a 24 hour follow-up， so if you extended the follow-up period， would you expect the benefit to be consistent or will it be lost? 

   《国际循环》：Nielson教授，感谢您在本次奥兰多AHA2011大会接受《国际循环》的采访。昨天您就MANTRA-PAF研究做了一个精彩的报告。这个研究是在阵发性心房颤动患者中进行的，试验结果显示在减少房颤负荷或发作方面，射频消融优于抗心律失常药。然而，这个获益仅在24小时的随访中显现，那么，如果延长随访期，您认为获益会持续还是会消失？

    Professor Nielson Yes， that’s a very good question. We saw the difference -- both treatments reduced the AF burden significantly. So both medical treatment and ablation treatment are effective for reducing AF burden. I believe we saw the difference first after two years because some patients need more than one ablation and because both treatment arms were effective. We will do a five year follow-up where we will see whether the effect is sustained after five years. 

     Nielson 教授：这是个很好的问题，我们看到了区别——两种治疗方法都显著减轻了房颤负荷。因此，无论是药物治疗还是消融治疗，都对减轻房颤负荷有效。我认为，首先我们已经看到了两年后的区别，因为有些病人需要不止一次消融，而且两种治疗方法都有效。我们会做一个5年的随访来观察是否疗效会持续5年。 

    <International circulation >: So you cannot tell for now?

  《国际循环》：所以您现在还没法告诉我们？

    Professor  Nielson : So we don’t know yet， no， but we think that our data supports that it may be beneficial to ablate the patients early and then you may avoid the remodeling of the atria and later progression of more atrial fibrillation. So that is not proven， but we think that our trial is a little stone there saying that early ablation may be beneficial.

     Nielson 教授：我们目前还不知道，但是我认为我们的资料支持早期对患者进行消融可能使患者获益，可以避免心房重构以及随后房颤的进展。这些还并没有被证实，但是我们认为我们的试验已经给早期消融获益提供了一些依据。