Clinical Guidelines & Documents
2017 HRS expert consensus statement on magnetic resonance imaging and radiation exposure in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices
Section I: Introduction and Methodology ...............e952017 ACC/AHA/HRS guideline for the evaluation and management of patients with syncope:
Glenn N. Levine, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair2017 ACC/AHA/HRS guideline for the evaluation and management of patients with syncope: Executive summary:
Glenn N. Levine, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair2015 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, Chair2015 Heart Rhythm Society Expert Consensus Statement on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Postural Tachycardia Syndrome, Inappropriate Sinus Tachycardia, and Vasovagal Syncope
This international consensus statement was written by experts in the field who were chosen by the Heart Rhythm Society, in collaboration with representatives from the American Autonomic Society (AAS), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), the Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES), and the Sociedad Latinoamericana de Estimulacion Cardiaca y Electrofisiologia (SOLAECE)-Latin American Society of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology.HRS/ACC/AHA Expert Consensus Statement on the Use of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy in Patients Who Are Not Included or Not Well Represented in Clinical Trials
The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) has emerged as an important treatment option for selected patients who are at risk of sudden cardiac death. Randomized trials have consistently shown that ICD implantation reduces mortality in patients with heart failure and reduced left ventricular function, as well as in patients who have suffered a cardiac arrest.1–3 Recommendations on the use of the ICD in clinical practice have been provided in four important guideline documents sponsored by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).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 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.
