Clinical Guidelines & Documents
Integrated electrophysiology care for patients with heart failure: An envisioned futureHeart failure (HF) is a chronic, progressive, and complex disease that is increasing in prevalence with a projected 46% increase from 2012 to 2030.1 Frequent hospital admissions have made HF one of the leading causes of health care expenditures, costing the system more than 30 billion US dollars a year.2 Many of these patients have cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), wearable devices, and atrial and ventricular arrhythmias. There is an increasing focus on how to best manage these patients, with the recognition that an integrated care model is optimal.
Rationale, considerations, and goals for atrial fibrillation centers of excellence: A Heart Rhythm Society perspectiveAtrial fibrillation (AF) remains an important global problem.1–3 AF continues to lead to poor health outcomes, including reduced quality of life (QoL) and increased risks of heart failure, cognitive impairment, stroke, and death.4,5 Moreover, it has a significant financial impact on health care systems and their associated economies.6–8 In order to improve care for patients with AF, there is an increasing recognition that current care must evolve. Health care organizations should move from a system of siloed outpatient and inpatient clinicians and health care facilities to a system of integrated, coordinated, and patient-centered AF centers.
2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmiasVentricular arrhythmias are an important cause of morbidity and mortality and come in a variety of forms, from single premature ventricular complexes to sustained ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation. Rapid developments have taken place over the past decade in our understanding of these arrhythmias and in our ability to diagnose and treat them. The field of catheter ablation has progressed with the development of new methods and tools, and with the publication of large clinical trials. Therefore, global cardiac electrophysiology professional societies undertook to outline recommendations and best practices for these procedures in a document that will update and replace the 2009 EHRA/HRS Expert Consensus on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias.
2017 HRS/EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: Executive summaryDuring the past three decades, catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) have evolved from investigational procedures to their current role as effective treatment options for patients with AF. Surgical ablation of AF, using either standard, minimally invasive, or hybrid techniques, is available in most major hospitals throughout the world. Catheter ablation of AF is even more widely available, and is now the most commonly performed catheter ablation procedure.
2017 HRS/EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillationDuring the past three decades, catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) have evolved from investigational procedures to their current role as effective treatment options for patients with AF. Surgical ablation of AF, using either standard, minimally invasive, or hybrid techniques, is available in most major hospitals throughout the world. Catheter ablation of AF is even more widely available, and is now the most commonly performed catheter ablation procedure.
2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testingDocument Reviewers: Giuseppe Boriani, MD, PhD (Italy); Michele Brignole, MD, FESC (Italy); Alan Cheng, MD, FHRS (USA); Thomas C. Crawford, MD, FACC, FHRS (USA); Luigi Di Biase, MD, PhD, FACC, FHRS (USA); Kevin Donahue, MD (USA); Andrew E. Epstein, MD, FAHA, FACC, FHRS (USA); Michael E. Field, MD, FACC, FHRS (USA); Bulent Gorenek, MD, FACC, FESC (Turkey); Jin-Long Huang, MD, PhD (China); Julia H. Indik, MD, PhD, FACC, FAHA, FHRS (USA); Carsten W. Israel, MD (Germany); Mariell L. Jessup MD, FACC, FAHA, FESC (USA); Christophe Leclercq, MD, PhD (France); Robert J.
HRS/NSA 2014 survey of atrial fibrillation and stroke: Gaps in knowledge and perspective, opportunities for improvementThe prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) is substantial and increasing. Stroke is common in AF and can have devastating consequences. Oral anticoagulants are effective in reducing stroke risk, but are underutilized.
Progress toward the prevention and treatment of atrial fibrillation: A summary of the Heart Rhythm Society Research Forum on the Treatment and Prevention of Atrial Fibrillation, Washington, DC, December 9–10, 2013The Heart Rhythm Society convened a research symposium on December 9–10, 2013, in Washington, DC, that focused on the prevention of atrial fibrillation (AF) as well as AF-related stroke and morbidity. Attendees sought to summarize advances in understanding AF since a 2008 National Institutes of Health (NIH) conference on this topic1 and to identify continued knowledge gaps and current research priorities. The research symposium also sought to identify key deficiencies and opportunities in research infrastructure, operations, and methodologies.
HRS/ACCF Expert Consensus Statement on Pacemaker Device and Mode Selection: Developed in partnership between the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) and the American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) and in collaboration with the Society of Thoracic SurgeonsThe most recent American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association/Heart Rhythm Society (ACCF/AHA/HRS) guidelines related to pacemaker implantation were published as part of a larger document related to device-based therapy.1 While this document provides some comments on pacemaker mode selection and algorithms to guide selection, it does not provide specific recommendations regarding choices for single- or dual-chamber devices. Over the past 15 years multiple randomized trials have compared a number of cardiovascular outcomes among patients randomized to atrial or dual-chamber pacing vs those randomized to ventricular pacing.