Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (Compilation of 2006 ACCF/AHA/ESC and 2011 ACCF/AHA/HRS Recommendations)

Abstract

HomeCirculationVol. 127, No. 18Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (Compilation of 2006 ACCF/AHA/ESC and 2011 ACCF/AHA/HRS Recommendations) Free AccessResearch ArticlePDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessResearch ArticlePDF/EPUBManagement of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (Compilation of 2006 ACCF/AHA/ESC and 2011 ACCF/AHA/HRS Recommendations)A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines Jeffrey L. Anderson, MD, FACC, FAHA, Jonathan L. Halperin, MD, FACC, FAHA, Nancy M. Albert, PhD, CCNS, CCRN, Biykem Bozkurt, MD, PhD, FACC, FAHA, Ralph G. Brindis, MD, MPH, MACC, Lesley H. Curtis, PhD, David DeMets, PhD, Robert A. Guyton, MD, FACC, Judith S. Hochman, MD, FACC, FAHA, Richard J. Kovacs, MD, FACC, FAHA, E. Magnus Ohman, MD, FACC, Susan J. Pressler, PhD, RN, FAAN, FAHA, Frank W. Sellke, MD, FACC, FAHA and Win-Kuang Shen, MD, FACC, FAHA Jeffrey L. AndersonJeffrey L. Anderson Search for more papers by this author , Jonathan L. HalperinJonathan L. Halperin Search for more papers by this author , Nancy M. AlbertNancy M. Albert Search for more papers by this author , Biykem BozkurtBiykem Bozkurt Search for more papers by this author , Ralph G. BrindisRalph G. Brindis Search for more papers by this author , Lesley H. CurtisLesley H. Curtis Search for more papers by this author , David DeMetsDavid DeMets Search for more papers by this author , Robert A. GuytonRobert A. Guyton Search for more papers by this author , Judith S. HochmanJudith S. Hochman Search for more papers by this author , Richard J. KovacsRichard J. Kovacs Search for more papers by this author , E. Magnus OhmanE. Magnus Ohman Search for more papers by this author , Susan J. PresslerSusan J. Pressler Search for more papers by this author , Frank W. SellkeFrank W. Sellke Search for more papers by this author and Win-Kuang ShenWin-Kuang Shen Search for more papers by this author Originally published1 Apr 2013https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0b013e318290826dCirculation. 2013;127:1916–1926Other version(s) of this articleYou are viewing the most recent version of this article. Previous versions: January 1, 2013: Previous Version 1 Table of ContentsIntroduction 19171. Management 19171.1. Pharmacological and Nonpharmacological Therapeutic Options 19171.1.1. Rate Control During AF 19171.1.2. Preventing Thromboembolism 19181.1.2.1. Antithrombotic Strategies for Prevention of Ischemic Stroke and Systemic Embolism 19191.1.2.1.1. Combining Anticoagulant With Antiplatelet Therapy (2011 New Section) 19191.1.2.1.2. Use of Oral Direct Thrombin Inhibitor Anticoagulant Agents (2011 New Section) 19191.1.3. Cardioversion of AF 19191.1.3.1. Dronedarone for the Prevention of Recurrent AF (2011 New Section) 19201.2. Direct-Current Cardioversion of AF and Flutter 19201.2.1. Pharmacological Enhancement of Direct-Current Cardioversion 19201.2.2. Prevention of Thromboembolism in Patients With AF Undergoing Cardioversion 19201.3. Maintenance of Sinus Rhythm 19211.4. Special Considerations 19211.4.1. Postoperative AF 19211.4.2. Acute Myocardial Infarction 19221.4.3. Wolff-Parkinson-White Preexcitation Syndromes 19221.4.4. Hyperthyroidism 19221.4.5. Pregnancy 19231.4.6. Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy 19231.4.7. Pulmonary Diseases 1923Appendix 1. 2011 Author Relationships With Industry and Other Entities 1924Appendix 2. 2006 Author Relationships With Industry 1926IntroductionThis document is a compilation of the current American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association (ACCF/AHA) practice guideline recommendations for atrial fibrillation (AF) from the “ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation),”* the “2011 ACCF/AHA/HRS Focused Update on the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (Updating the 2006 Guideline)”† and the “2011 ACCF/AHA/HRS Focused Update on the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (Update on Dabigatran).”‡ Updated and new recommendations from 2011 are noted and outdated recommendations have been removed. No new evidence was reviewed, and no recommendations included herein are original to this document. The ACCF/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines chooses to republish the recommendations in this format to provide the complete set of practice guideline recommendations in a single resource.1. Management1.1. Pharmacological and Nonpharmacological Therapeutic Options1.1.1. Rate Control During AFClass IMeasurement of the heart rate at rest and control of the rate using pharmacological agents (either a beta blocker or nondihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist, in most cases) are recommended for patients with persistent or permanent AF. (Level of Evidence: B)In the absence of preexcitation, intravenous administration of beta blockers (esmolol, metoprolol, or propranolol) or nondihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists (verapamil, diltiazem) is recommended to slow the ventricular response to AF in the acute setting, exercising caution in patients with hypotension or heart failure (HF). (Level of Evidence: B)Intravenous administration of digoxin or amiodarone is recommended to control the heart rate in patients with AF and HF who do not have an accessory pathway. (Level of Evidence: B)In patients who experience symptoms related to AF during activity, the adequacy of heart rate control should be assessed during exercise, adjusting pharmacological treatment as necessary to keep the rate in the physiological range. (Level of Evidence: C)Digoxin is effective following oral administration to control the heart rate at rest in patients with AF and is indicated for patients with HF, left ventricular (LV) dysfunction, or for sedentary individuals. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIaA combination of digoxin and either a beta blocker or nondihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist is reasonable to control the heart rate both at rest and during exercise in patients with AF. The choice of medication should be individualized and the dose modulated to avoid bradycardia. (Level of Evidence: B)It is reasonable to use ablation of the atrioventricular (AV) node or accessory pathway to control heart rate when pharmacological therapy is insufficient or associated with side effects. (Level of Evidence: B)Intravenous amiodarone can be useful to control the heart rate in patients with AF when other measures are unsuccessful or contraindicated. (Level of Evidence: C)When electrical cardioversion is not necessary in patients with AF and an accessory pathway, intravenous procainamide or ibutilide is a reasonable alternative. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIbWhen the ventricular rate cannot be adequately controlled both at rest and during exercise in patients with AF using a beta blocker, nondihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist, or digoxin, alone or in combination, oral amiodarone may be administered to control the heart rate. (Level of Evidence: C)Intravenous procainamide, disopyramide, ibutilide, or amiodarone may be considered for hemodynamically stable patients with AF involving conduction over an accessory pathway. (Level of Evidence: B)When the rate cannot be controlled with pharmacological agents or tachycardia-mediated cardiomyopathy is suspected, catheter-directed ablation of the AV node may be considered in patients with AF to control the heart rate. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIIDigitalis should not be used as the sole agent to control the rate of ventricular response in patients with paroxysmal AF. (Level of Evidence: B)Catheter ablation of the AV node should not be attempted without a prior trial of medication to control the ventricular rate in patients with AF. (Level of Evidence: C)In patients with decompensated HF and AF, intravenous administration of a nondihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist may exacerbate hemodynamic compromise and is not recommended. (Level of Evidence: C)Intravenous administration of digitalis glycosides or nondihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists to patients with AF and a preexcitation syndrome may paradoxically accelerate the ventricular response and is not recommended. (Level of Evidence: C)Class III: No Benefit2011 New Recommendation: Treatment to achieve strict rate control of heart rate (80 bpm at rest or 110 bpm during a 6-minute walk) is not beneficial compared to achieving a resting heart rate 110 bpm in patients with persistent AF who have stable ventricular function (LV ejection fraction 0.40) and no or acceptable symptoms related to the arrhythmia, though uncontrolled tachycardia may over time be associated with a reversible decline in ventricular performance. (Level of Evidence: B)1.1.2. Preventing ThromboembolismClass IAntithrombotic therapy to prevent thromboembolism is recommended for all patients with AF, except those with lone AF or contraindications. (Level of Evidence: A)The selection of the antithrombotic agent should be based upon the absolute risks of stroke and bleeding and the relative risk and benefit for a given patient. (Level of Evidence: A)For patients without mechanical heart valves at high risk of stroke, chronic oral anticoagulant therapy with a vitamin K antagonist is recommended in a dose adjusted to achieve the target intensity international normalized ratio (INR) of 2.0 to 3.0, unless contraindicated. Factors associated with highest risk for stroke in patients with AF are prior thromboembolism (stroke, transient ischemic attack, or systemic embolism) and rheumatic mitral stenosis. (Level of Evidence: A)Anticoagulation with a vitamin K antagonist is recommended for patients with more than 1 moderate risk factor. Such factors include age 75 y or greater, hypertension, HF, impaired LV systolic function (ejection fraction 35% or less or fractional shortening less than 25%), and diabetes mellitus. (Level of Evidence: A)INR should be determined at least weekly during initiation of therapy and monthly when anticoagulation is stable. (Level of Evidence: A)Aspirin, 81–325mg daily, is recommended as an alternative to vitamin K antagonists in low-risk patients or in those with contraindications to oral anticoagulation. (Level of Evidence: A)For patients with AF who have mechanical heart valves, the target intensity of anticoagulation should be based on the type of prosthesis, maintaining an INR of at least 2.5. (Level of Evidence: B)Antithrombotic therapy is recommended for patients with atrial flutter as for those with AF. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIaFor primary prevention of thromboembolism in patients with nonvalvular AF who have just 1 of the following validated risk factors, antithrombotic therapy with either aspirin or a vitamin K antagonist is reasonable, based upon an assessment of the risk of bleeding complications, ability to safely sustain adjusted chronic anticoagulation, and patient preferences: age greater than or equal to 75 y (especially in female patients), hypertension, HF, impaired LV function, or diabetes mellitus. (Level of Evidence: A)For patients with nonvalvular AF who have 1 or more of the following less well-validated risk factors, antithrombotic therapy with either aspirin or a vitamin K antagonist is reasonable for prevention of thromboembolism: age 65 to 74 y, female gender, or coronary artery disease. The choice of agent should be based upon the risk of bleeding complications, ability to safely sustain adjusted chronic anticoagulation, and patient preferences. (Level of Evidence: B)It is reasonable to select antithrombotic therapy using the same criteria irrespective of the pattern (ie, paroxysmal, persistent, or permanent) of AF. (Level of Evidence: B)In patients with AF who do not have mechanical prosthetic heart valves, it is reasonable to interrupt anticoagulation for up to 1 week without substituting heparin for surgical or diagnostic procedures that carry a risk of bleeding. (Level of Evidence: C)It is reasonable to reevaluate the need for anticoagulation at regular intervals. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIbIn patients 75 y of age and older at increased risk of bleeding but without frank contraindications to oral anticoagulant therapy, and in other patients with moderate risk factors for thromboembolism who are unable to safely tolerate anticoagulation at the standard intensity of INR 2.0 to 3.0, a lower INR target of 2.0 (range 1.6 to 2.5) may be considered for primary prevention of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism. (Level of Evidence: C)When surgical procedures require interruption of oral anticoagulant therapy for longer than 1 week in high-risk patients, unfractionated heparin may be administered or low-molecular-weight heparin given by subcutaneous injection, although the efficacy of these alternatives in this situation is uncertain. (Level of Evidence: C)Following percutaneous coronary intervention or revascularization surgery in patients with AF, low-dose aspirin (less than 100 mg per d) and/or clopidogrel (75 mg per d) may be given concurrently with anticoagulation to prevent myocardial ischemic events, but these strategies have not been thoroughly evaluated and are associated with an increased risk of bleeding. (Level of Evidence: C)In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, anticoagulation may be interrupted to prevent bleeding at the site of peripheral arterial puncture, but the vitamin K antagonist should be resumed as soon as possible after the procedure and the dose adjusted to achieve an INR in the therapeutic range. Aspirin may be given temporarily during the hiatus, but the maintenance regimen should then consist of the combination of clopidogrel, 75 mg daily, plus warfarin (INR 2.0 to 3.0). Clopidogrel should be given for a minimum of 1 mo after implantation of a bare metal stent, at least 3 mo for a sirolimus-eluting stent, at least 6 mo for a paclitaxel-eluting stent, and 12 mo or longer in selected patients, following which warfarin may be continued as monotherapy in the absence of a subsequent coronary event. When warfarin is given in combination with clopidogrel or low-dose aspirin, the dose intensity must be carefully regulated. (Level of Evidence: C)In patients with AF younger than 60 y without heart disease or risk factors for thromboembolism (lone AF), the risk of thromboembolism is low without treatment and the effectiveness of aspirin for primary prevention of stroke relative to the risk of bleeding has not been established. (Level of Evidence: C)In patients with AF who sustain ischemic stroke or systemic embolism during treatment with low-intensity anticoagulation (INR 2.0 to 3.0), rather than add an antiplatelet agent, it may be reasonable to raise the intensity of anticoagulation to a maximum target INR of 3.0 to 3.5. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIILong-term anticoagulation with a vitamin K antagonist is not recommended for primary prevention of stroke in patients below the age of 60 y without heart disease (lone AF) or any risk factors for thromboembolism. (Level of Evidence: C)1.1.2.1. Antithrombotic Strategies for Prevention of Ischemic Stroke and Systemic Embolism1.1.2.1.1. Combining Anticoagulant With Antiplatelet Therapy (2011 New Section)Class IIb2011 New Recommendation: The addition of clopidogrel to aspirin to reduce the risk of major vascular events, including stroke, might be considered in patients with AF in whom oral anticoagulation with warfarin is considered unsuitable due to patient preference or the physician's assessment of the patient's ability to safely sustain anticoagulation. (Level of Evidence: B)1.1.2.1.2. Use of Oral Direct Thrombin Inhibitor Anticoagulant Agents (2011 New Section)Class I2011 New Recommendation: Dabigatran is useful as an alternative to warfarin for the prevention of stroke and systemic thromboembolism in patients with paroxysmal to permanent AF and risk factors for stroke or systemic embolization who do not have a prosthetic heart valve or hemodynamically significant valve disease, severe renal failure (creatinine clearance 15 mL/min) or advanced liver disease (impaired baseline clotting function). (Level of Evidence: B)1.1.3. Cardioversion of AFClass IAdministration of flecainide, dofetilide, propafenone, or ibutilide is recommended for pharmacological cardioversion of AF. (Level of Evidence: A)Class IIaAdministration of amiodarone is a reasonable option for pharmacological cardioversion of AF. (Level of Evidence: A)A single oral bolus dose of propafenone or flecainide (pill-in-the-pocket) can be administered to terminate persistent AF outside the hospital once treatment has proved safe in hospital for selected patients without sinus or AV node dysfunction, bundle-branch block, QT-interval prolongation, the Brugada syndrome, or structural heart disease. Before antiarrhythmic medication is initiated, a beta blocker or nondihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist should be given to prevent rapid AV conduction in the event atrial flutter occurs. (Level of Evidence: C)Administration of amiodarone can be beneficial on an outpatient basis in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF when rapid restoration of sinus rhythm is not deemed necessary. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIbAdministration of quinidine or procainamide might be considered for pharmacological cardioversion of AF, but the usefulness of these agents is not well established. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIIDigoxin and sotalol may be harmful when used for pharmacological cardioversion of AF and are not recommended. (Level of Evidence: A)Quinidine, procainamide, disopyramide, and dofetilide should not be started out of hospital for conversion of AF to sinus rhythm. (Level of Evidence: B)1.1.3.1. Dronedarone for the Prevention of Recurrent AF (2011 New Section)Class IIa2011 New Recommendation: Dronedarone is reasonable to decrease the need for hospitalization for cardiovascular events in patients with paroxysmal AF or after conversion of persistent AF. Dronedarone can be initiated during outpatient therapy. (Level of Evidence: B)Class III: Harm2011 New Recommendation: Dronedarone should not be administered to patients with class IV heart failure or patients who have had an episode of decompensated heart failure in the past 4 weeks, especially if they have depressed left ventricular function (left ventricular ejection fraction <35%). (Level of Evidence: B)1.2. Direct-Current Cardioversion of AF and FlutterClass IWhen a rapid ventricular response does not respond promptly to pharmacological measures for patients with AF with ongoing myocardial ischemia, symptomatic hypotension, angina, or HF, immediate R-wave synchronized direct-current cardioversion is recommended. (Level of Evidence: C)Immediate direct-current cardioversion is recommended for patients with AF involving preexcitation when very rapid tachycardia or hemodynamic instability occurs. (Level of Evidence: B)Cardioversion is recommended in patients without hemodynamic instability when symptoms of AF are unacceptable to the patient. In case of early relapse of AF after cardioversion, repeated direct-current cardioversion attempts may be made following administration of antiarrhythmic medication. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIaDirect-current cardioversion can be useful to restore sinus rhythm as part of a long-term management strategy for patients with AF. (Level of Evidence: B)Patient preference is a reasonable consideration in the selection of infrequently repeated cardioversions for the management of symptomatic or recurrent AF. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIIFrequent repetition of direct-current cardioversion is not recommended for patients who have relatively short periods of sinus rhythm between relapses of AF after multiple cardioversion procedures despite prophylactic antiarrhythmic drug therapy. (Level of Evidence: C)Electrical cardioversion is contraindicated in patients with digitalis toxicity or hypokalemia. (Level of Evidence: C)1.2.1. Pharmacological Enhancement of Direct-Current CardioversionClass IIaPretreatment with amiodarone, flecainide, ibutilide, propafenone, or sotalol can be useful to enhance the success of direct-current cardioversion and prevent recurrent atrial fibrillation. (Level of Evidence: B)In patients who relapse to AF after successful cardioversion, it can be useful to repeat the procedure following prophylactic administration of antiarrhythmic medication. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIbFor patients with persistent AF, administration of beta blockers, disopyramide, diltiazem, dofetilide, procainamide, or verapamil may be considered, although the efficacy of these agents to enhance the success of direct-current cardioversion or to prevent early recurrence of AF is uncertain. (Level of Evidence: C)Out-of-hospital initiation of antiarrhythmic medications may be considered in patients without heart disease to enhance the success of cardioversion of AF. (Level of Evidence: C)Out-of-hospital administration of antiarrhythmic medications may be considered to enhance the success of cardioversion of AF in patients with certain forms of heart disease once the safety of the drug has been verified for the patient. (Level of Evidence: C)1.2.2. Prevention of Thromboembolism in Patients With AF Undergoing CardioversionClass IFor patients with AF of 48-hour duration or longer, or when the duration of AF is unknown, anticoagulation (INR 2.0 to 3.0) is recommended for at least 3 wk prior to and 4 wk after cardioversion, regardless of the method (electrical or pharmacological) used to restore sinus rhythm. (Level of Evidence: B)For patients with AF of more than 48-h duration requiring immediate cardioversion because of hemodynamic instability, heparin should be administered concurrently (unless contraindicated) by an initial intravenous bolus injection followed by a continuous infusion in a dose adjusted to prolong the activated partial thromboplastin time to 1.5 to 2 times the reference control value. Thereafter, oral anticoagulation (INR 2.0 to 3.0) should be provided for at least 4 wk, as for patients undergoing elective cardioversion. Limited data support subcutaneous administration of low-molecular-weight heparin in this indication. (Level of Evidence: C)For patients with AF of less than 48-h duration associated with hemodynamic instability (angina pectoris, myocardial infarction (MI), shock, or pulmonary edema), cardioversion should be performed immediately without delay for prior initiation of anticoagulation. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIaDuring the first 48 h after onset of AF, the need for anticoagulation before and after cardioversion may be based on the patient's risk of thromboembolism. (Level of Evidence: C)As an alternative to anticoagulation prior to cardioversion of AF, it is reasonable to perform transesophageal echocardiogram in search of thrombus in the left atrium or left atrium appendage. (Level of Evidence: B)2a.For patients with no identifiable thrombus, cardioversion is reasonable immediately after anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin (eg, initiate by intravenous bolus injection and an infusion continued at a dose adjusted to prolong the activated partial thromboplastin time to 1.5 to 2 times the control value until oral anticoagulation has been established with a vitamin K antagonist (eg, warfarin), as evidenced by an INR equal to or greater than 2.0.) (Level of Evidence: B). Thereafter, continuation of oral anticoagulation (INR 2.0 to 3.0) is reasonable for a total anticoagulation period of at least 4 wk, as for patients undergoing elective cardioversion (Level of Evidence: B). Limited data are available to support the subcutaneous administration of a low-molecular-weight heparin in this indication. (Level of Evidence: C)2b.For patients in whom thrombus is identified by transesophageal echocardiogram, oral anticoagulation (INR 2.0 to 3.0) is reasonable for at least 3 wk prior to and 4 wk after restoration of sinus rhythm, and a longer period of anticoagulation may be appropriate even after apparently successful cardioversion, because the risk of thromboembolism often remains elevated in such cases. (Level of Evidence: C)For patients with atrial flutter undergoing cardioversion, anticoagulation can be beneficial according to the recommendations as for patients with AF. (Level of Evidence: C)1.3. Maintenance of Sinus RhythmClass IBefore initiating antiarrhythmic drug therapy, treatment of precipitating or reversible causes of AF is recommended. (Level of Evidence: C)2011 Updated Recommendation: Catheter ablation performed in experienced centers§ is useful in maintaining sinus rhythm in selected patients with significantly symptomatic, paroxysmal AF who have failed treatment with an antiarrhythmic drug and have normal or mildly dilated left atria, normal or mildly reduced LV function, and no severe pulmonary disease. (Level of Evidence: A)Class IIaPharmacological therapy can be useful in patients with AF to maintain sinus rhythm and prevent tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy. (Level of Evidence: C)Infrequent, well-tolerated recurrence of AF is reasonable as a successful outcome of antiarrhythmic drug therapy. (Level of Evidence: C)Outpatient initiation of antiarrhythmic drug therapy is reasonable in patients with AF who have no associated heart disease when the agent is well tolerated. (Level of Evidence: C)2011 Updated Recommendation: In patients with AF without structural or coronary heart disease, initiation of propafenone or flecainide can be beneficial on an outpatient basis in patients with paroxysmal AF who are in sinus rhythm at the time of drug initiation. (Level of Evidence: B)Sotalol can be beneficial in outpatients in sinus rhythm with little or no heart disease, prone to paroxysmal AF, if the baseline uncorrected QT interval is less than 460 ms, serum electrolytes are normal, and risk factors associated with class III drugrelated proarrhythmia are not present. (Level of Evidence: C)2011 New Recommendation: Catheter ablation is reasonable to treat symptomatic persistent AF. (Level of Evidence: A)Class IIb2011 New Recommendation: Catheter ablation may be reasonable to treat symptomatic paroxysmal AF in patients with significant left atrial dilatation or with significant LV dysfunction. (Level of Evidence: A)Class III: HarmAntiarrhythmic therapy with a particular drug is not recommended for maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with AF who have well-defined risk factors for proarrhythmia with that agent. (Level of Evidence: A)Pharmacological therapy is not recommended for maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with advanced sinus node disease or AV node dysfunction unless they have a functioning electronic cardiac pacemaker. (Level of Evidence: C)1.4. Special Considerations1.4.1. Postoperative AFClass IUnless contraindicated, treatment with an oral beta blocker to prevent postoperative AF is recommended for patients undergoing cardiac surgery. (Level of Evidence: A)Administration of AV nodal blocking agents is recommended to achieve rate control in patients who develop postoperative AF. (Level of Evidence: B)Class IIaPreoperative administration of amiodarone reduces the incidence of AF in patients undergoing cardiac surgery and represents appropriate prophylactic therapy for patients at high risk for postoperative AF. (Level of Evidence: A)It is reasonable to restore sinus rhythm by pharmacological cardioversion with ibutilide or direct-current cardioversion in patients who develop post-operative AF as advised for nonsurgical patients. (Level of Evidence: B)It is reasonable to administer antiarrhythmic medications in an attempt to maintain sinus rhythm in patients with recurrent or refractory postoperative AF, as recommended for other patients who develop AF. (Level of Evidence: B)It is reasonable to administer antithrombotic medication in patients who develop postoperative AF, as recommended for nonsurgical patients. (Level of Evidence: B)Class IIbProphylactic administration of sotalol may be considered for patients at risk of developing AF following cardiac surgery. (Level of Evidence: B)1.4.2. Acute Myocardial InfarctionClass IDirect-current cardioversion is recommended for patients with severe hemodynamic compromise or intractable ischemia, or when adequate rate control cannot be achieved with pharmacological agents in patients with acute MI and AF. (Level of Evidence: C)Intravenous administration of amiodarone is recommended to slow a rapid ventricular response to AF and improve LV function in patients with acute MI. (Level of Evidence: C)Intravenous beta blockers and nondihydropyridine calcium antagonists are recommended to slow a rapid ventricular response to AF in patients with acute MI who do not display clinical LV dysfunction, bronchospasm, or AV block. (Level of Evidence: C)For patients with AF and acute MI, administration of unfractionated heparin by either continuous intravenous infusion or intermittent subcutaneous injection is recommended in a dose sufficient to prolong the activated partial thromboplastin time to 1.5 to 2.0 times the control value, unless contraindications to anticoagulation exist. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIaIntravenous administration of digitalis is reasonable to slow a rapid ventricular response and improve LV function in patients with acute MI and AF associated with severe LV dysfunction and HF. (Level of Evidence: C)Class IIIThe administration of class IC antiarrhythmic drugs is not recommended in patients with AF in the setting of acute MI. (Level of Evidence: C)1.4.3. Wolff-Parkinson-White Preexcitation SyndromesClass ICatheter ablation of the accessory pathway is recommended in symptomatic patients with AF who have Wolff-Parkinson-White Preexcitation syndrome, particularly those with syncope due to rapid heart