Chung, Mina

Sinus tachycardia (ST) is ubiquitous, but its presence outside of normal physiological triggers in otherwise healthy individuals remains a commonly encountered phenomenon in medical practice. In many cases, ST can be readily explained by a current medical condition that precipitates an increase in the sinus rate, but ST at rest without physiological triggers may also represent a spectrum of normal. In other cases, ST may not have an easily explainable cause but may represent serious underlying pathology and can be associated with intolerable symptoms. The classification of ST, consideration of possible etiologies, as well as the decisions of when and how to intervene can be difficult. ST can be classified as secondary to a specific, usually treatable, medical condition (eg, pulmonary embolism, anemia, infection, or hyperthyroidism) or be related to several incompletely defined conditions (eg, inappropriate ST, postural tachycardia syndrome, mast cell disorder, or post-COVID syndrome). While cardiologists and cardiac electrophysiologists often evaluate patients with symptoms associated with persistent or paroxysmal ST, an optimal approach remains uncertain. Due to the many possible conditions associated with ST, and an overlap in medical specialists who see these patients, the inclusion of experts in different fields is essential for a more comprehensive understanding. This article is unique in that it was composed by international experts in Neurology, Psychology, Autonomic Medicine, Allergy and Immunology, Exercise Physiology, Pulmonology and Critical Care Medicine, Endocrinology, Cardiology, and Cardiac Electrophysiology in the hope that it will facilitate a more complete understanding and thereby result in the better care of patients with ST.

There is a growing appreciation for differences in epidemiology, treatment, and outcomes of cardiovascular conditions by sex. Historically, cardiovascular clinical trials have under-represented females, but findings have nonetheless been applied to clinical care in a sex-agnostic manner. Thus, much of the collective knowledge about sex-specific cardiovascular outcomes result from post hoc and secondary analyses. In some cases, these investigations have revealed important sex-based differences with implications for optimizing care for female patients with arrhythmias. This review explores the available evidence related to cardiac arrhythmia care among females, with emphasis on areas in which important sex differences are known or suggested. Considerations related to improving female enrollment in clinical trials as a way to establish more robust clinical evidence for the treatment of females are discussed. Areas of remaining evidence gaps are provided, and recommendations for areas of future research and specific action items are suggested. The overarching goal is to improve appreciation for sex-based differences in cardiac arrhythmia care as 1 component of a comprehensive plan to optimize arrhythmia care for all patients.