Pharmacologic management of ARVD involves arrhythmia suppression and prevention of thrombus formation.

Sotalol, a beta blocker and a class III antiarrhythmic agent, is the most effective antiarrhythmic agent in ARVD. Other antiarrhythmic agents used include amiodarone and conventional beta blockers (i.e.: metoprolol). If antiarrhythmic agents are used, their efficacy should be guided by series ambulatory holter monitoring, to show a reduction in arrhythmic events.

While angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE Inhibitors) are well known for slowing progression in other cardiomyopathies, they have not been proven to be helpful in ARVD.

Individuals with decreased RV ejection fraction with dyskinetic portions of the right ventricle may benefit from long term anticoagulation with warfarin to prevent thrombus formation and subsequent pulmonary embolism.

Diet alone cannot treat pacemaker syndrome, but an appropriate diet to the patient, in addition to the other treatment regimens mentioned, can improve the patient's symptoms. Several cases mentioned below:

- For patients with heart failure, low-salt diet is indicated.

- For patients with autonomic insufficiency, a high-salt diet may be appropriate.

- For patients with dehydration, oral fluid rehydration is needed.

The cause of sudden death in Brugada syndrome is ventricular fibrillation (VF). The average age of death is 41. According to clinical reports, sudden death in people with Brugada syndrome most often happens during sleep. The episodes of syncope (fainting) and sudden death (aborted or not) are caused by fast polymorphic ventricular tachycardias or ventricular fibrillation. These arrhythmias appear with no warning. While there is no exact treatment modality that reliably and totally prevents ventricular fibrillation from occurring in this syndrome, treatment lies in termination of this lethal arrhythmia before it causes death. This is done via insertion of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), which continuously monitors the heart rhythm and will shock the wearer if ventricular fibrillation is sensed.

Studies have evaluated the role of quinidine, a Class Ia antiarrhythmic drug, for decreasing VF episodes occurring in this syndrome. Quinidine has been found to both decrease the number of VF episodes and correct spontaneous ECG changes, possibly via inhibiting I channels.

Some drugs have been reported to induce the type-1 ECG and/or (fatal) arrhythmias in Brugada syndrome patients. Patients with Brugada syndrome can prevent arrhythmias by avoiding these drugs or using them only in controlled conditions. Those with risk factors for coronary artery disease may require an angiogram before ICD implantation.

No specific drugs are used to treat pacemaker syndrome directly because treatment consists of upgrading or reprogramming the pacemaker.

Catheter ablation may be used to treat intractable ventricular tachycardia.

It has a 60–90% success rate. Unfortunately, due to the progressive nature of the disease, recurrence is common (60% recurrence rate), with the creation of new arrhythmogenic foci. Indications for catheter ablation include drug-refractory VT and frequent recurrence of VT after ICD placement, causing frequent discharges of the ICD.

Artificial pacemakers have been used in the treatment of sick sinus syndrome.

Bradyarrhythmias are well controlled with pacemakers, while tachyarrhythmias respond well to medical therapy.

However, because both bradyarrhythmias and tachyarrhythmias may be present, drugs to control tachyarrhythmia may exacerbate bradyarrhythmia. Therefore, a pacemaker is implanted before drug therapy is begun for the tachyarrhythmia.

The definitive treatment of WPW is the destruction of the abnormal electrical pathway by radiofrequency catheter ablation. This procedure is performed by cardiac electrophysiologists. Radiofrequency catheter ablation is not performed in all individuals with WPW because inherent risks are involved in the procedure. When performed by an experienced electrophysiologist, radiofrequency ablation has a high success rate. Findings from 1994 indicate success rates of as high as 95% in people treated with radiofrequency catheter ablation for WPW. If radiofrequency catheter ablation is successfully performed, the condition is generally considered cured. Recurrence rates are typically less than 5% after a successful ablation. The one caveat is that individuals with underlying Ebstein's anomaly may develop additional accessory pathways during progression of their disease.

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).

As previously stated, management of HFpEF is primarily dependent on the treatment of symptoms and exacerbating conditions. Currently treatment with ACE inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, beta blockers, and angiotensin receptor blockers are employed but do not have a proven benefit in HFpEF patients. Additionally, use of Diuretics or other therapies that can alter loading conditions or blood pressure should be used with caution. It is not recommended that patients be treated with phosphodiesterase-5-inhibitors or digoxin.

Antimineralocorticoid is currently recommended for patients with HFpEF who show elevated brain natriuretic peptide levels. Spironolactone is the first member of this drug class and the most frequently employed. Care should be taken to monitor serum potassium levels as well as kidney function, specifically glomerular filtration rate during treatment.

Beta blockers play a rather obscure role in HFpEF treatment but appear to play a beneficial role in patient management. There is currently a deficit of clinical evidence to support a particular benefit for HFpEF patients, with most evidence resulting from HFpEF patients' inclusion in broader heart failure trials. However, some evidence suggests that vasodilating beta blockers, such as nebivolol, can provide a benefit for patients with heart failure regardless of ejection fraction. Additionally, because of the chronotropic perturbation and diminished LV filling seen in HFpEF the bradycardic effect of beta blockers may enable improved filling, reduced myocardial oxygen demand and lowered blood pressure. However, this effect also can contribute to diminished response to exercise demands and can result in an excessive reduction in heart rate.

ACE inhibitors do not appear to improve morbidity or mortality associated with HFpEF alone. However, they are important in the management of hypertension, a significant player in the pathophysiology of HFpEF.

Angiotensin II receptor blocker treatment shows an improvement in diastolic dysfunction and hypertension that is comparable to other anti-hypertensive medication.

Despite increasing incidence of HFpEF effective inroads to therapeutics have been largely unsuccessful. Currently, recommendations for treatment are directed at symptom relief and co-morbid conditions. Frequently this involves administration of diuretics to relieve complications associated with volume overload, such as leg swelling and high blood pressure.

Commonly encountered conditions that must be treated for and have independent recommendations for standard of care include atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. There are particular factors unique to HFpEF that must be accounted for with therapy. Unfortunately, currently available randomized clinical trials addressing the therapeutic adventure for these conditions in HFpEF present conflicting or limited evidence.

Specific aspects of therapeutics should be avoided in HFpEF to prevent the deterioration of the condition. Considerations that are generalizable to heart failure include avoidance of a fast heart rate, elevations in blood pressure, development of ischemia, and atrial fibrillation. More specific to HFpEF include avoidance of preload reduction. As patients display normal ejection fraction but reduced cardiac output they are especially sensitive to changes in preloading and may rapidly display signs of output failure. This means administration of diuretics and vasodilators must be monitored carefully.

HFrEF and HFpEF represent distinct entities in terms of development and effective therapeutic management. Specifically cardiac resynchronization, administration of beta blockers and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors are applied to good effect in HFrEF but are largely ineffective at reducing morbidity and mortality in HFpEF. Many of these therapies are effective in reducing the extent of cardiac dilation and increasing ejection fraction in HFrEF patients. It is unsurprising they fail to effect improvement in HFpEF patients, given their un-dilated phenotype and relative normal ejection fraction. Understanding and targeting mechanisms unique to HFpEF are thus essential to the development of therapeutics.

Randomized studies on HFpEF patients have shown that exercise improves left ventricular diastolic function, the heart's ability to relax, and is associated with improved aerobic exercise capacity. The benefit patients seem to derive from exercise does not seem to be a direct cardiac effect but rather is due to changes in peripheral vasculature and skeletal muscle, which show abnormalities in HFpEF patients.

Patients should be regularly assessed to determine progression of the condition, response to interventions, and need for alteration of therapy. Ability to perform daily tasks, hemodynamic status, kidney function, electrolyte balance, and serum natriuretic peptide levels are important parameters. Behavioral management is important in these patients and it is recommended that individuals with HFpEF avoid alcohol, smoking, and high sodium intake.

Initial treatment can be medical, involving the use of drugs like isoprenaline (Isuprel) and epinephrine (adrenaline). Definitive treatment is surgical, involving the insertion of a pacemaker – most likely one with sequential pacing such as a DDI mode as opposed to the older VVI mechanisms, and the doctor may arrange the patient to undergo electrocardiography to confirm this type of treatment.

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.

Treatment of restrictive cardiomyopathy should focus on management of causative conditions (for example, using corticosteroids if the cause is sarcoidosis), and slowing the progression of cardiomyopathy. Salt-restriction, diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and anticoagulation may be indicated for managing restrictive cardiomyopathy.

Calcium channel blockers are generally contraindicated due to their negative inotropic effect, particularly in cardiomyopathy caused by amyloidosis. Digoxin, calcium channel blocking drugs and beta-adrenergic blocking agents provide little benefit, except in the subgroup of restrictive cardiomyopathy with atrial fibrillation. Vasodilators are also typically ineffective because systolic function is usually preserved in cases of RCM.

Heart failure resulting from restrictive cardiomyopathy will usually eventually have to be treated by cardiac transplantation or left ventricular assist device.

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.

Ebstein's cardiophysiology typically presents as an (antidromic) AV reentrant tachycardia with associated pre-excitation. In this setting, the preferred medication treatment agent is procainamide. Since AV-blockade may promote conduction over the accessory pathway, drugs such as beta blockers, calcium channel blockers, and digoxin are contraindicated.

If atrial fibrillation with pre-excitation occurs, treatment options include procainamide, flecainide, propafenone, dofetilide, and ibutilide, since these medications slow conduction in the accessory pathway causing the tachycardia and should be administered before considering electrical cardioversion. Intravenous amiodarone may also convert atrial fibrillation and/or slow the ventricular response.

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.

Rate control to a target heart rate of less than 110 beats per minute is recommended in most people. Lower heart rates may be recommended in those with left ventricular hypertrophy or reduced left ventricular function. Rate control is achieved with medications that work by increasing the degree of block at the level of the AV node, decreasing the number of impulses that conduct into the ventricles. This can be done with:

- Beta blockers (preferably the "cardioselective" beta blockers such as metoprolol, bisoprolol, or nebivolol)

- Non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (e.g., diltiazem or verapamil)

- Cardiac glycosides (e.g., digoxin) – have less use, apart from in older people who are sedentary. They are not as effective as either beta blockers or calcium channel blockers.

In those with chronic disease either beta blockers or calcium channel blockers are recommended.

In addition to these agents, amiodarone has some AV node blocking effects (in particular when administered intravenously), and can be used in individuals when other agents are contraindicated or ineffective (particularly due to hypotension).

Drug therapy can slow down progression and in some cases even improve the heart condition. Standard therapy may include salt restriction, ACE inhibitors, diuretics, and beta blockers. Anticoagulants may also be used for antithrombotic therapy. There is some evidence for the benefits of coenzyme Q10 in treating heart failure.

Defibrillation is the definitive treatment of ventricular fibrillation, whereby an electrical current is applied to the ventricular mass either directly or externally through pads or paddles, with the aim of depolarising enough of the myocardium for co-ordinated contractions to occur again. The use of this is often dictated around the world by Advanced Cardiac Life Support or Advanced Life Support algorithms, which is taught to medical practitioners including doctors, nurses and paramedics and also advocates the use of drugs, predominantly epinephrine, after every second unsuccessful attempt at defibrillation, as well as cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in between defibrillation attempts. Though ALS/ACLS algorithms encourage the use of drugs, they state first and foremost that defibrillation should not be delayed for any other intervention and that adequate cardiopulmonary resuscitation be delivered with minimal interruption.

The precordial thump is a manoeuver promoted as a mechanical alternative to defibrillation. Some advanced life support algorithms advocate its use once and only in the case of witnessed and monitored V-fib arrests as the likelihood of it successfully cardioverting a patient are small and this diminishes quickly in the first minute of onset.

Patients who survive a 'V-fib arrest' and who make a good recovery from this are often considered for implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, which can quickly deliver this same life-saving defibrillation should another episode of ventricular fibrillation occur outside a hospital environment.

The management includes identifying and correcting electrolyte imbalances and withholding any offending medications. This condition does not require admission unless there is an associated myocardial infarction. Even though it usually does not progress to higher forms of heart block, it may require outpatient follow-up and monitoring of the ECG, especially if there is a comorbid bundle branch block. If there is a need for treatment of an unrelated condition, care should be taken not to introduce any medication that may slow AV conduction. If this is not feasible, clinicians should be very cautious when introducing any drug that may slow conduction; and regular monitoring of the ECG is indicated.

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.

The Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) recommends surgical intervention for these indications:

- Limited exercise capacity (NYHA III-IV)

- Increasing heart size (cardiothoracic ratio greater than 65%)

- Important cyanosis (resting oxygen saturation less than 90% - level B)

- Severe tricuspid regurgitation with symptoms

- Transient ischemic attack or stroke

The CCS further recommends patients who require operation for Ebstein's anomaly should be operated on by congenital heart surgeons who have substantial specific experience and success with this operation. Every effort should be made to preserve the native tricuspid valve.

The tumor must be surgically removed. Some patients will also need their mitral valve replaced. This can be done during the same surgery.

Myxomas may come back if surgery did not remove all of the tumor cells.

Artificial pacemakers may be used in patients with intraventricular conduction delay, and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in those at risk of arrhythmia. These forms of treatment have been shown to prevent sudden cardiac death, improve symptoms, and reduce hospitalization in patients with systolic heart failure.

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.