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).

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.

Isolated PVCs with benign characteristics require no treatment.

In healthy individuals, PVCs can often be resolved by restoring the balance of magnesium, calcium and potassium within the body. In one randomized controlled trial with 60 people those with 260 mg magnesium daily supplementation (in magnesium pidolate) had an average reduction of PVC by 77%. In another trial with 232 persons with frequent ventricular arrhythmias (> 720 PVC/24 h) those with 6 mmol of magnesium (146 mg Mg)/12 mmol of potassium-DL-hydrogenaspartate daily supplementation had median reduction of PVCs by 17%.

The most effective treatment is the elimination of triggers (particularly stopping the use of substances such as caffeine and certain drugs, like tobacco).

- Medications

- Antiarrhythmics: these agents alter the electrophysiologic mechanisms responsible for PVCs. In CAST study of survivors of myocardial infarction encainide and flecainide, although could suppress PVC, they increased death risk; moricizine increased death rate when used with diuretics and decreased it when used alone.

- Beta blockers

- Calcium channel blockers

- Electrolytes replacement

- Magnesium supplements (e.g. magnesium citrate, orotate, Maalox, etc.)

- Potassium supplements (e.g. chloride potassium with citrate ion)

- Radiofrequency catheter ablation treatment. It is advised for people with ventricular dysfunction and frequent arrhythmias or very frequent PVC (>20% in 24 h) and normal ventricular function. This procedure is a way to destroy the area of the heart tissue that is causing the irregular contractions characteristic of PVCs using radio frequency energy.

- Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

- Lifestyle modification

- Frequently stressed individuals should consider therapy, or joining a support group.

- Heart attacks can increase the likelihood of having PVCs.

In the setting of existing heart disease, however, PVCs must be watched carefully, as they may cause a form of ventricular tachycardia (rapid heartbeat).

The American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association recommend evaluation for coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients who have frequent PVCs and cardiac risk factors, such as hypertension and smoking (SOR C). Evaluation for CAD may include stress testing, echocardiography, and ambulatory rhythm monitoring.

For those who are stable with a monomorphic waveform the medications procainamide or sotalol may be used and are better than lidocaine. Evidence does not show that amiodarone is better than procainamide.

As a low magnesium level in the blood is a common cause of VT, magnesium sulfate can be given for torsades de pointes or if a low blood magnesium level is found/suspected.

Long-term anti-arrhythmic therapy may be indicated to prevent recurrence of VT. Beta-blockers and a number of class III anti-arrhythmics are commonly used, such as the beta-blockers carvedilol, metoprolol, and bisoprolol, and the Potassium-Channel-Blockers amiodarone, dronedarone,bretylium, sotalol, ibutilide, and dofetilide. Angiotensin-converting-eynsyme (ACE) inhibitors and aldostrone antatagonists are also sometimes used in this setting.

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.

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.

A person with pulseless VT is treated the same as ventricular fibrillation with high-energy (360J with a monophasic defibrillator, or 200J with a biphasic defibrillator) unsynchronised cardioversion (defibrillation). They will be unconscious.

The shock may be delivered to the outside of the chest using the two pads of an external defibrillator, or internally to the heart by an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) if one has previously been inserted.

An ICD may also be set to attempt to overdrive pace the ventricle. Pacing the ventricle at a rate faster than the underlying tachycardia can sometimes be effective in terminating the rhythm. If this fails after a short trial, the ICD will usually stop pacing, charge up and deliver a defibrillation grade shock.

In general, atrial flutter should be managed the same as atrial fibrillation. Because both rhythms can lead to the formation of a blood clot in the atrium, individuals with atrial flutter usually require some form of anticoagulation or antiplatelet agent. Both rhythms can be associated with dangerously fast heart rates and thus require medication to control the heart rate (such as beta blockers or calcium channel blockers) and/or rhythm control with class III antiarrhythmics (such as ibutilide or dofetilide). However, atrial flutter is more resistant to correction with such medications than atrial fibrillation. For example, although the class III antiarrhythmic agent ibutilide is an effective treatment for atrial flutter, rates of recurrence after treatment are quite high (70-90%). Additionally, there are some specific considerations particular to treatment of atrial flutter.

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.

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.

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.

Cardiac resuscitation guidelines (ACLS/BCLS) advise that Cardiopulmonary resuscitation should be initiated promptly to maintain cardiac output until the PEA can be corrected. The approach in treatment of PEA is to treat the underlying cause, if known (e.g. relieving a tension pneumothorax). Where an underlying cause for PEA cannot be determined and/or reversed, the treatment of pulseless electrical activity is similar to that for asystole. There is no evidence that external cardiac compression can increase cardiac output in any of the many scenarios of PEA, such as hemorrhage, in which impairment of cardiac filling is the underlying mechanism producing loss of a detectable pulse.

An intravenous or intraosseous line should be started to provide medications through. The mainstay of drug therapy for PEA is epinephrine (adrenaline) 1 mg every 3–5 minutes. Although previously the use of atropine was recommended in the treatment of PEA/asystole, this recommendation was withdrawn in 2010 by the American Heart Association due to lack of evidence for therapeutic benefit. Epinephrine too has a limited evidence base, and it is recommended on the basis of its mechanism of action.

Sodium bicarbonate 1meq per kilogram may be considered in this rhythm as well, although there is little evidence to support this practice. Its routine use is not recommended for patients in this context, except in special situations (e.g. preexisting metabolic acidosis, hyperkalemia, tricyclic antidepressant overdose).

All of these drugs should be administered along with appropriate CPR techniques. Defibrillators cannot be used to correct this rhythm, as the problem lies in the response of the myocardial tissue to electrical impulses.

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.

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.

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.

Treatment is directed towards the withdrawal of the offending agent, infusion of magnesium sulfate, antiarrhythmic drugs, and electrical therapy, such as a temporary pacemaker, as needed.

Because of the polymorphic nature of torsades de pointes, synchronized cardioversion may not be possible, and the patient may require an unsynchronized shock (or defibrillation).

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

Medications, while included in guidelines, have not been shown to improve survival to hospital discharge following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. This includes the use of epinephrine, atropine, lidocaine, and amiodarone. Epinephrine is generally recommended every five minutes. Vasopressin overall does not improve or worsen outcomes compared to epinephrine.

Epinephrine does appear to improve short-term outcomes such as return of spontaneous circulation. Some of the lack of long-term benefit may be related to delays in epinephrine use. While evidence does not support its use in children guidelines state its use is reasonable. Lidocaine and amiodarone are also deemed reasonable in children with cardiac arrest who have a shockable rhythm. The general use of sodium bicarbonate or calcium is not recommended.

The 2010 guidelines from the American Heart Association no longer contain the recommendation for using atropine in pulseless electrical activity and asystole due to the lack of evidence for its use. Neither lidocaine nor amiodarone, in those who continue in ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation despite defibrillation, improves survival to hospital discharge but both equally improve survival to hospital admission.

Thrombolytics when used generally may cause harm but may be of benefit in those with a confirmed pulmonary embolism as the cause of arrest. Evidence for use of naloxone in those with cardiac arrest due to opioids is unclear but it may still be used. In those with cardiac arrest due to local anesthetic lipid emulsion may be used.

Current treatment options for Boxer cardiomyopathy are largely restricted to the use of oral anti-arrhythmic medications. The aim of therapy is to minimize ventricular ectopy, eliminate syncopal episodes, and prevent sudden cardiac death. A number of medications have been used for this purpose, including atenolol, procainamide, sotalol, mexiletine, and amiodarone. Combinations can also be used. Sotalol is probably the most commonly used antiarrhythmic at this time. It has been demonstrated that sotalol alone, or a combination of mexiletine and atenolol, results in a reduction in the frequency and complexity of ventricular ectopy. It is likely that these medications also reduce syncopal episodes, and it is hoped this extends to a reduced risk of sudden death. Consequently, antiarrhythmic therapy is typically recommended by veterinary cardiologists for Boxer dogs with ARVC. Although relatively rare, oral antiarrhythmic medications may be proarrhythmic in some dogs; consequently, appropriate monitoring and follow-up is recommended.

The ideal therapy for Boxer cardiomyopathy would be implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). This has been attempted in a limited number of dogs. Unfortunately, ICDs are programmed for humans and the algorithms used are not appropriate for dogs, increasing the risk of inappropriate shocks. In the future, reprogramming of ICDs may allow them to emerge as a viable option in the treatment for Boxer cardiomyopathy.

For patients in acute heart failure, ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and beta blockers, are considered mainstays of heart failure treatment. But use of beta blockers specifically for takotsubo cardiomyopathy is controversial, because they may confer no benefit.