<International circulation >: So you think the patients intension is the most important criteria?
《国际循环》：您认为患者的意愿是最重要的标准？
Professor Nielson : I think that the patient should be involved in the decision of which treatment should be selected for themselves. Yes they should get this information (that) there are different options (such as) ablation and drug therapy. Which one they should choose is not clear， but when they have this information about advantages and risks between the two， they can contribute in choosing the correct treatment.
Nielson 教授：我认为患者应该参与对他们自己选择哪种治疗的决定。他们应该得到关于不同治疗选择，如消融和药物治疗的信息。他们会选择哪个并不确定，但是如果他们得知了两者的获益和风险之后，他们就可以协助医生做出正确选择。
<International circulation >: So what is the current standard clinical practice in treating pAF patients?
《国际循环》：那么对于治疗阵发性房颤患者，目前标准的临床实践是什么？
Professor Nielson : The current standard still is -- most patients will start antiarrhythmic drug treatment first. But in selected patients， younger patients， we will discuss that there are more treatment options， such as ablation first， or ablation if drugs are not effective. Then we will involve the patients in making this decision.
Neilson教授：目前的标准仍然是：绝大多数患者会首先进行抗心律失常药物治疗。但是在一些特定的患者，如较年轻的患者，我们会和患者讨论，目前有更多的治疗选择，例如首先进行消融，或者在药物无效时消融。然后就可以让患者参与到决定中来。
<International circulation >: So it’s quite similar to these trials conclusions?
《国际循环》：和这些试验的结论很类似？
Professor Nielson : Yes
Neilson教授：是的
<International circulation >: And so do you think this conclusion is strong enough to change our guidelines?
《国际循环》：您认为这个结论足以修改我们的指南吗？
Professor Nielson : I think that according to the European guidelines， they are pretty much supported by this trial. That in select patients after careful information is given， you could use ablation as first line treatment， but it is not first line treatment for all patients with paroxysmal AF， not at all.
Nielson 教授：我认为我们的试验很大程度上支持欧洲指南。在告知患者详细信息之后，你可以将消融作为一线治疗，但是并不是所有的阵发性房颤患者都应将其作为一线治疗。
<International circulation >: Thank you very much
《国际循环》：非常感谢。
上一页 [1] [2] [3]