Goldschlager, Nora

A previously healthy person in their 60s with progressive shortness of breath and fatigue for the past 6 months presented to the emergency department with palpitations and shortness of breath. What is your diagnosis?

One of the most important roles for professional societies in medicine is assembling multiple stakeholders and experts to develop documents that can help guide and define policies and strategies for best medical care. Each year the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) develops several consensus documents that address critical clinical subjects that have been identified by input from HRS members and HRS committees. Over the past 5 years, HRS has produced documents with multiple professional societies from around the world, and although the topics chosen for exploration center around arrhythmia management, the reviews and recommendations made in the documents are important for clinical cardiologists and generalists who are not arrhythmia specialists. When an internist or other primary care provider identifies a patient who may be having symptoms from an arrhythmia, the referral first is made to the clinical cardiologist and only later, if necessary, does an arrhythmia specialist become involved. These expert consensus statements are developed for specific clinical questions regarding arrhythmia management where there is controversy or uncertainty, often with less data from randomized controlled trials to help guide recommendations, which must then be made by extrapolation of existing data, observational data, and expert opinion. In this 2‐part review, the consensus statements developed by the HRS over the past 5 years that pertain to adults are discussed in part 1; part 2 focuses on consensus statements that HRS has developed in conjunction with the Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society that address arrhythmia issues in children and adults with congenital heart disease.

One of the most important roles for professional societies in medicine is assembling multiple stakeholders and experts to develop documents that can help guide and define policies and strategies for best medical care. Each year the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) develops several consensus documents that address critical clinical subjects that have been identified by input from HRS members and HRS committees. Over the past 5 years, HRS has produced documents with multiple professional societies from around the world, and although the topics chosen for exploration center around arrhythmia management, the reviews and recommendations made in the documents are important for clinical cardiologists and generalists who are not arrhythmia specialists. When an internist or other primary care provider identifies a patient who may be having symptoms from an arrhythmia, the referral first is made to the clinical cardiologist and only later, if necessary, does an arrhythmia specialist become involved. These expert consensus statements are developed for specific clinical questions regarding arrhythmia management where there is controversy or uncertainty, often with less data from randomized controlled trials to help guide recommendations, which must then be made by extrapolation of existing data, observational data, and expert opinion. In this 2‐part review, the consensus statements developed by the HRS over the past 5 years that pertain to adults are discussed in part 1; part 2 focuses on consensus statements that HRS has developed in conjunction with the Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society that address arrhythmia issues in children and adults with congenital heart disease.

Syncope is common representing approximately 3% of ED visits and up to 6% of hospital admissions, with a cost close to 2 billion dollars per year. Diagnostic testing is often poorly sensitive and evaluations commonly lack a standardized approach. A mindful and systematic approach can increase sensitivity and improve diagnostic accuracy. A thorough history and physical exam is paramount, as conclusions drawn from the history and exam will guide further assessment. Developing a strategy for the first and, if necessary, subsequent tests will improve the accuracy of identifying the etiology of syncope and reduce cost. Although syncope has a favorable prognosis, identification of patients with structural heart disease is critical, as these patients are at greatest risk for mortality. Several risk scoring systems have been developed to help separate high risk from low risk patients.

Symptomatic sustained cardiac arrhythmias are frequently observed in in the coronary care unit and often lead to hemodynamic compromise, especially in the presence of multisystem disease. The predominant arrhythmias noted in intensive care units are tachyarrhythmias, particularly atrial fibrillation and flutter, and ventricular tachycardia. Bradycardias, arguably less life-threatening than tachyarrhythmias, can arise from sinus node dysfunction or atrioventricular conduction block; transient vagally-mediated bradycardias are frequently encountered as well. Prompt diagnosis of the patient with tachycardia is critical as treatment depends on the accurate diagnosis of tachycardia mechanism. The electrocardiogram remains the most important diagnostic tool for the evaluation of both wide and narrow complex tachycardia. The electrocardiographic diagnosis of wide complex tachycardia is based on evaluation of atrioventricular relationship and QRS morphology while the diagnosis of narrow complex tachycardia is based on the location and morphology of P waves. It is important for critical care specialists to understand the principles of cardiac arrhythmia diagnosis and remain current with the recent advances in the pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic management of patients with arrhythmias.

Symptomatic arrhythmias are frequently observed in the intensive care unit and often lead to significant hemodynamic compromise because of the presence of multisystem disease. In particular, prompt evaluation of patients with tachycardia is critical because treatment depends on the accurate diagnosis of the arrhythmia mechanism. The electrocardiogram remains the most important diagnostic tool for the evaluation of both wide complex and narrow complex tachycardia. For wide complex tachycardia, evaluation of the atrioventricular relationship and QRS morphology are critical, and for narrow QRS complex tachycardias, evaluation focuses on identification of the location and morphology of P waves. Bradycardia can arise from sinus node dysfunction or atrioventricular conduction block.