Article Text

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Systematic review and meta-analysis
Early ambulation after percutaneous coronary intervention does not increase bleeding risk compared with late ambulation
  1. Craig Juergens
  1. Department of Cardiology, Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia and South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  1. Correspondence to: Associate Professor Craig Juergens
    Department of Cardiology, Liverpool Hospital, Elizabeth Street, Liverpool, NSW 2170, Australia; c.juergens{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Commentary on: Tongsai S, Thamlikitkul V. The safety of early versus late ambulation in the management of patients after percutaneous coronary interventions: a meta-analysis. Int J Nurs Stud 2012;49:1084–90.

Implications for practice and research

  • Early ambulation after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may facilitate earlier hospital discharge and improve patient comfort.

  • There are a limited number of randomised clinical trials assessing the safety of this strategy.

  • This meta-analysis suggests that earlier ambulation was not associated with an increased risk of adverse bleeding events.


The number of PCIs performed around the world continues to increase due to a rising incidence of patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease. Despite an increased interest in performing the procedure via the radial approach, with large-scale clinical trials demonstrating reductions in vascular complications and time to ambulation, the majority of cases involve femoral arterial access. While vascular closure devices (VCDs) facilitate …

View Full Text


  • Competing interests None.