Anticoagulation can be used to reduce the risk of stroke from AF. Anticoagulation is recommended in most people other than those at low risk of stroke or those at high risk of bleeding. The risk of falls and consequent bleeding in frail elderly people with atrial fibrillation should not be considered a barrier to initiating or continuing therapeutic anticoagulation since the risk of fall-related brain bleeding (intracranial hemorrhage) is low and the benefit of stroke prevention outweighs the risk of bleeding. Oral anticoagulation is underused in atrial fibrillation while aspirin is overused in many who should be treated with a novel oral anticoagulant or warfarin.

The risk of stroke from non-valvular AF can be estimated using the CHADS-VASc score. A 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline said that for nonvalvular AF, anticoagulation is recommended if there is a score of 2 or more, not using anticoagulation or using aspirin may be considered if there is a score of 1, and not using anticoagulation is reasonable if there is a score of 0. In contrast, guidelines from the American College of Chest Physicians, Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society, Canadian Cardiovascular Society, European Society of Cardiology, Japanese Circulation Society, Korean Heart Rhythm Society, and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommend the use of novel oral anticoagulants or warfarin with a CHADS2VASC score of 1 over aspirin and some directly recommend against aspirin. Experts generally advocate for most people with atrial fibrillation with CHADS2VASC scores of 1 or more receiving anticoagulation though aspirin is sometimes used for people with a CHADS2VASC score of 1 (moderate risk for stroke). There is little evidence to support the idea that the use of aspirin significantly reduces the risk of stroke in people with atrial fibrillation. Furthermore, aspirin's major bleeding risk (including intracranial hemorrhage) is similar to that of warfarin and NOACs despite its inferior efficacy.

Anticoagulation can be achieved through a number of means including warfarin, heparin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, edoxaban, and apixaban. A number of issues should be considered, including the cost of NOACs, risk of stroke, risk of falls, compliance, and speed of desired onset of anticoagulation.

For those with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, the NOACs (rivaroxaban, dabigatran, apixaban) are neither superior to nor worse than warfarin in preventing non-hemorrhagic stroke and systemic embolic events. They have a lower risk of intracranial bleeding compared to warfarin; however, dabigatran is associated with a higher risk of gastrointestinal bleeding.

The main goals of treatment are to prevent circulatory instability and stroke. Rate or rhythm control are used to achieve the former, whereas anticoagulation is used to decrease the risk of the latter. If cardiovascularly unstable due to uncontrolled tachycardia, immediate cardioversion is indicated. Regular, moderate-intensity exercise is beneficial for people with AF.

Atrial flutter is considerably more sensitive to electrical direct current cardioversion than atrial fibrillation, with a shock of only (20 to 50) J commonly being enough to cause a return to a normal heart rhythm (sinus rhythm). Exact placement of the pads does not appear important.

Due to the reentrant nature of atrial flutter, it is often possible to ablate the circuit that causes atrial flutter with radiofrequency catheter ablation. Catheter ablation is considered to be a first-line treatment method for many people with typical atrial flutter due to its high rate of success (>90%) and low incidence of complications. This is done in the cardiac electrophysiology lab by causing a ridge of scar tissue in the cavotricuspid isthmus that crosses the path of the circuit that causes atrial flutter. Eliminating conduction through the isthmus prevents reentry, and if successful, prevents the recurrence of the atrial flutter. Atrial fibrillation often occurs (30% within 5 years) after catheter ablation for atrial flutter.

There are many classes of antiarrhythmic medications, with different mechanisms of action and many different individual drugs within these classes. Although the goal of drug therapy is to prevent arrhythmia, nearly every anti arrhythmic drug has the potential to act as a pro-arrhythmic, and so must be carefully selected and used under medical supervision.

A number of other drugs can be useful in cardiac arrhythmias.

Several groups of drugs slow conduction through the heart, without actually preventing an arrhythmia. These drugs can be used to "rate control" a fast rhythm and make it physically tolerable for the patient.

Some arrhythmias promote blood clotting within the heart, and increase risk of embolus and stroke. Anticoagulant medications such as warfarin and heparins, and anti-platelet drugs such as aspirin can reduce the risk of clotting.

Therapy may be directed either at terminating an episode of the abnormal heart rhythm or at reducing the risk of another VT episode. The treatment for stable VT is tailored to the specific person, with regard to how well the individual tolerates episodes of ventricular tachycardia, how frequently episodes occur, their comorbidities, and their wishes. Individuals suffering from pulseless VT or unstable VT are hemodynamically compromised and require immediate electric cardioversion to shock them out of the VT rhythm.

Most SVTs are unpleasant rather than life-threatening, although very fast heart rates can be problematic for those with underlying ischemic heart disease or the elderly. Episodes require treatment when they occur, but interval therapy may also be used to prevent or reduce recurrence. While some treatment modalities can be applied to all SVTs, there are specific therapies available to treat some sub-types. Effective treatment consequently requires knowledge of how and where the arrhythmia is initiated and its mode of spread.

SVTs can be classified by whether the AV node is involved in maintaining the rhythm. If so, slowing conduction through the AV node will terminate it. If not, AV nodal blocking maneuvers will not work, although transient AV block is still useful as it may unmask an underlying abnormal rhythm.

If a person still has a pulse, it is usually possible to terminate the episode using electric cardioversion. This should be synchronized to the heartbeat if the waveform is monomorphic if possible, in order to avoid degeneration of the rhythm to ventricular fibrillation. An initial energy of 100J is recommended. If the waveform is polymorphic, then higher energies and an unsynchronized shock should be provided (also known as defibrillation).

Treatment in emergency situations ultimately involves electrical pacing. Pharmacological management of suspected beta-blocker overdose might be treated with glucagon, calcium channel blocker overdose treated with calcium chloride and digitalis toxicity treated with the digoxin immune Fab.

Third-degree AV block can be treated by use of a dual-chamber artificial pacemaker. This type of device typically listens for a pulse from the SA node via lead in the right atrium and sends a pulse via a lead to the right ventricle at an appropriate delay, driving both the right and left ventricles. Pacemakers in this role are usually programmed to enforce a minimum heart rate and to record instances of atrial flutter and atrial fibrillation, two common secondary conditions that can accompany third-degree AV block. Since pacemaker correction of third-degree block requires full-time pacing of the ventricles, a potential side effect is pacemaker syndrome, and may necessitate use of a biventricular pacemaker, which has an additional 3rd lead placed in a vein in the left ventricle, providing a more coordinated pacing of both ventricles.

The 2005 Joint European Resuscitation and Resuscitation Council (UK) guidelines state that atropine is the first line treatment especially if there were any adverse signs, namely: 1) heart rate 3 seconds. Mobitz Type 2 AV block is another indication for pacing.

As with other forms of heart block, secondary prevention may also include medicines to control blood pressure and atrial fibrillation, as well as lifestyle and dietary changes to reduce risk factors associated with heart attack and stroke.

Once an acute arrhythmia has been terminated, ongoing treatment may be indicated to prevent recurrence. However, those that have an isolated episode, or infrequent and minimally symptomatic episodes, usually do not warrant any treatment other than observation.

In general, patients with more frequent or disabling symptoms warrant some form of prevention. A variety of drugs including simple AV nodal blocking agents such as beta-blockers and verapamil, as well as anti-arrhythmics may be used, usually with good effect, although the risks of these therapies need to be weighed against potential benefits.

Radiofrequency ablation has revolutionized the treatment of tachycardia caused by a re-entrant pathway. This is a low-risk procedure that uses a catheter inside the heart to deliver radio frequency energy to locate and destroy the abnormal electrical pathways. Ablation has been shown to be highly effective: around 90% in the case of AVNRT. Similar high rates of success are achieved with AVRT and typical atrial flutter.

Cryoablation is a newer treatment for SVT involving the AV node directly. SVT involving the AV node is often a contraindication for using radiofrequency ablation due to the small (1%) incidence of injuring the AV node, requiring a permanent pacemaker. Cryoablation uses a catheter supercooled by nitrous oxide gas freezing the tissue to −10 °C. This provides the same result as radiofrequency ablation but does not carry the same risk. If you freeze the tissue and then realize you are in a dangerous spot, you can halt freezing the tissue and allow the tissue to spontaneously rewarm and the tissue is the same as if you never touched it. If after freezing the tissue to −10 °C you get the desired result, then you freeze the tissue down to a temperature of −73 °C and you permanently ablate the tissue.

This therapy has further improved the treatment options for people with AVNRT (and other SVTs with pathways close to the AV node), widening the application of curative ablation to young patients with relatively mild but still troublesome symptoms who would not have accepted the risk of requiring a pacemaker.

In people without underlying heart disease and who do not have any symptoms, bigeminy in itself does not require any treatment. If it does become symptomatic, beta-blockers can be used to try and suppress ventricular ectopy. Class I and III agents are generally avoided as they can provoke more serious arrhythmias.

Medical therapy can be initiated with medications that slow electrical conduction through the AV node of the heart such as adenosine (which is a form of pharmacologic cardioversion), beta blockers, or non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (such as verapamil or diltiazem). Numerous other antiarrhythmic drugs may be effective if the more commonly used medications have not worked; these include flecainide or amiodarone. Both adenosine and beta blockers may cause tightening of the airways, and are therefore used with caution in people who are known to have asthma.

A separate form of AV nodal reentrant tachycardia is "pacemaker-mediated tachycardia" (PMT), a possible complication of dual-chamber artificial pacemakers. In PMT, the artificial pacemaker forms the anterograde (atrium to ventricle) limb of the circuit and the atrioventricular (AV) node forms the retrograde limb (ventricle to atrium) of the circuit. Treatment of PMT typically involves reprogramming the pacemaker.

Premature atrial contractions are often benign, requiring no treatment. Occasionally, the patient having the PAC will find these symptoms bothersome, in which case the doctor may treat the PACs. Sometimes the PACs can indicate heart disease or an increased risk for other cardiac arrhythmias. In this case the underlying cause is treated. Often a beta blocker will be prescribed for symptomatic PACs.

People with atrial fibrillation and rapid ventricular response are often treated with amiodarone or procainamide to stabilize their heart rate. Procainamide and cardioversion are now accepted treatments for conversion of tachycardia found with WPW. Amiodarone was previously thought to be safe in atrial fibrillation with WPW, but after several cases of ventricular fibrillation, it is no longer recommended in this clinical scenario.

AV node blockers should be avoided in atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter with WPW or history of it; this includes adenosine, diltiazem, verapamil, other calcium channel blockers, and beta blockers. They can exacerbate the syndrome by blocking the heart's normal electrical pathway (therefore favoring 1:1 atrial to ventricle conduction through the pre-excitation pathway, potentially leading to unstable ventricular arrhythmias).

People with WPW who are experiencing tachydysrhythmias may require synchronized electrical cardioversion if they are demonstrating severe signs or symptoms (for example, low blood pressure or lethargy with altered mental status). If they are relatively stable, medication may be used.

Acute management is as for SVT in general. The aim is to interrupt the circuit. In the shocked patient, DC cardioversion may be necessary. In the absence of shock, inhibition at the AV node is attempted. This is achieved first by a trial of specific physical maneuvers such as holding a breath in or bearing down. If these maneuvers fail, using intravenous adenosine; causes complete electrical blockade at the AV node and interrupts the reentrant electrical circuit. Long-term management includes beta blocker therapy and radiofrequency ablation of the accessory pathway.

Treatment is aimed at slowing the rate by correcting acidosis, correcting electrolytes (especially magnesium and calcium), cooling the patient, and antiarrhythmic medications. Occasionally pacing of the atrium at a rate higher than the JET may allow improved cardiac function by allowing atrial and ventricular synchrony.

A 1994 study at the Adolph Basser Institute of Cardiology found that amiodarone, an antiarrhythmic agent, could be used safely and relatively effectively.

JET occurring after the first six months of life is somewhat more variable, but may still be difficult to control. Treatment of non-post-operative JET is typically with antiarrhythmic medications or a cardiac catheterization with ablation (removal of affected tissue). A cardiac catheterization may be performed to isolate and ablate (burn or freeze) the source of the arrhythmia. This can be curative in the majority of cases. The use of radiofrequency energy is infrequently associated with damage to the normal conduction due to the close proximity to the AV node, the normal conduction tissue. The use of cryotherapy (cold energy) appears to be somewhat safer, and can also be effective for the treatment of JET.

Sinoatrial blocks are typically well-tolerated. They are not as serious as an AV block and most often do not require treatment. In some people, they can cause fainting, altered mental status, chest pain, hypoperfusion, and signs of shock. They can also lead to cessation of the SA node and more serious dysrhythmias. Emergency treatment, if deemed necessary, consists of administration of atropine sulfate or transcutaneous pacing.

The prognosis of patients with complete heart block is generally poor without therapy. Patients with 1st and 2nd degree heart block are usually asymptomatic.

Treatment of TIC involves treating both the tachyarrhythmia and the heart failure with the goal of adequate rate control or restoration of the normal heart rhythm (aka. normal sinus rhythm) to reverse the cardiomyopathy. The treatment of the tachyarrhythmia depends on the specific arrhythmia, but possible treatment modalities include rate control, rhythm control with antiarrhythmic agents and cardioversion, radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation, or AV node ablation with permanent pacemaker implantation.

For TIC due to atrial fibrillation, rate control, rhythm control, and RF catheter ablation can be effective to control the tachyarrhythmia and improve left ventricular systolic function. For TIC due to atrial flutter, rate control is often difficult to achieve, and RF catheter ablation has a relatively high success rate with a low risk of complications. In patients with TIC due to other types of SVT, RF catheter ablation is recommended as a first-line treatment. In patients with TIC due to VT or PVCs, both antiarrhythmics and RF catheter ablation can be used. However, the options for antiarrhythmic agents are limited because certain agents can be proarrhythmic in the setting of myocardial dysfunction in TIC. Therefore, RF catheter ablation is often a safe and effective choice for treatment VT and PVCs causing TIC. In cases where other treatment strategies fail, AV node ablation with permanent pacemaker implantation can also be used to treat the tachyarrhythmia.

The treatment of heart failure commonly involves neurohormonal blockade with beta-blockers and angiotensin convertase inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) along with symptomatic management with diuretics. Beta-blockers and ACE inhibitors can inhibit and potentially reverse the negative cardiac remodeling, which refers to structural changes in the heart, that occurs in TIC. However, the need to continue these agents after treatment of the tacharrhythmia and resolution of left ventricular systolic dysfunction remains controversial.

Management of multifocal atrial tachycardia consists mainly of the treatment of the underlying cause, but if clinically judged necessary, the rate may in some cases be reduced by administering the calcium channel blocker verapamil or the beta blocker metoprolol.

Administration of oxygen may play a role in the treatment of some patients.

In otherwise healthy patients, occasional premature atrial contractions are a common and normal finding and do not indicate any particular health risk. Rarely, in patients with other underlying structural heart problems, PACs can trigger a more serious arrhythmia such as atrial flutter or atrial fibrillation. In otherwise healthy people, PACs usually disappear with adolescence.

The prognosis for TIC after treatment of the underlying tachyarrhythmia is generally good. Studies show that left ventricular function often improves within 1 month of treatment of the tachyarrhythmia, and normalization of the left ventricular ejection fraction occurs in the majority of patients by 3 to 4 months. In some patients however, recovery of this function can take greater than 1 year or be incomplete. In addition, despite improvement in the left ventricular ejection fraction, studies have demonstrated that patients with prior TIC continue to demonstrate signs of negative cardiac remodeling including increased left ventricular end-systolic dimension, end-systolic volume, and end-diastolic volume. Additionally, recurrence of the tachyarrhythmia in patients with a history of TIC has been associated with a rapid decline in left ventricular ejection fraction and more severe cardiomyopathy that their prior presentation, which may be a result of the negative cardiac remodeling. There have also been cases of sudden death in patients with a history of TIC, which may be associated with worse baseline left ventricular dysfunction. Given these risks, routine monitoring with clinic visits, ECG, and echocardiography is recommended.