<International circulation >:  And also yesterday your slides showed that almost two thirds of those drug treated patients that were going through the ablation procedure

  《国际循环》：昨天您的报告显示，几乎三分之二接受药物治疗的患者会接受消融术？

    Professor  Nielson : One third， yes， one third need supplementary ablation because otherwise we could not achieve symptom control.

    Neilson教授：是三分之一，三分之一的患者需要追加消融，否则没法控制这部分患者的症状。
    <International circulation >:  And yesterday you also said you would not choose the ablation for all PAF patients， so what are your criteria for those first comers? 

  《国际循环》：昨天您还说过，您不会选择让所有阵发性房颤患者接受消融，那么，你选择接受消融的患者的标准是什么？

    Professor  Nielson : I think this is where this trial is beneficial because this can help us to inform the patients that， if the patients are like our patients here--pretty young， they were a mean 55 years old and without much comorbidity--such patients， if they prefer ablation， you can first inform them that ablation is at least as good as drug treatment. But they have to be aware that there are some risks (in) doing ablation procedures. If they， after this information， still want to undergo ablation then it’s a reasonable treatment， as a first time treatment， but only in these selected patients.

     Nielson 教授：我认为这就是这个实验有益之处，因为这个可以帮助我们告知患者，如果患者和我们试验的患者一样——较年轻，平均55岁，没有很多伴随疾病——这样的患者，如果他们选择消融，你可以首先告诉他们，消融至少和药物治疗效果等同。但是他们必须注意，消融术中存在一些风险。如果他们在被告知之后，还是想接受消融，那么对符合上述条件的这部分患者来说，消融就可以作为首选治疗。