Clinical Guidelines & Documents
2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias
Ventricular 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.2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias: Executive summary
Ventricular 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.Transparent sharing of digital health data: A call to action
Advisors: Mintu P. Turakhia, MD, MAS, FHRS, Jill Schaeffer, MSN, CRNP, FHRS, CEPS, CCDS, G. Stuart Mendenhall, MD, FHRS, Gerhard Hindricks, MD, Sanjiv M. Narayan, MD, PhD, FHRS, Elizabeth E. Davenport, BA, RN, Nassir F. Marrouche, MD, FHRSHRS White Paper on interoperability of data from cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs)
This HRS Needs Assessment is in the category of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) documents delineating a future direction of research, technology development, or health care policy and adheres to the following requirements set forth by the HRS:2017 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death: Executive summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society
Glenn N. Levine, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair2017 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society
Glenn N. Levine, MD, FACC, FAHA, ChairProceedings from Heart Rhythm Society’s emerging technologies forum, Boston, MA, May 12, 2015
Physicians are in an excellent position to significantly contribute to medical device innovation, but the process of bringing an idea to the bedside is complex. To begin to address these perceived barriers, the Heart Rhythm Society convened a forum of stakeholders in medical device innovation in conjunction with the 2015 Heart Rhythm Society Annual Scientific Sessions. The forum facilitated open discussion on medical device innovation, including obstacles to physician involvement and possible solutions.2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing
Document 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.Risk stratification for arrhythmic events in patients with asymptomatic pre-excitation: A systematic review for the 2015 ACC/AHA/HRS guideline for the management of adult patients with supraventricular tachycardia: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society
To review the literature systematically to determine whether noninvasive or invasive risk stratification, such as with an electrophysiological study of patients with asymptomatic pre-excitation, reduces the risk of arrhythmic events and improves patient outcomes.2015 ACC/AHA/HRS guideline for the management of adult patients with supraventricular tachycardia: Executive summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society
Jonathan L. Halperin, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair2015 ACC/AHA/HRS guideline for the management of adult patients with supraventricular tachycardia: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society
Jonathan L. Halperin, MD, FACC, FAHA, ChairHRS/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 Surgeons
The 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.
