Skip to main content
. 2022 Feb 23;34(5):913–926. doi: 10.1111/den.14237

Table 7.

Prevalence of electrolyte disorder after bowel preparation

Bowel preparation Study Number of patients Hypokalemia Hyponatremia Hypernatremia Hyperphosphatemia Hypocalcemia
High‐volume
PEG 4 L Clarkston et al. 25 49 2.0% 4.1%
Klare et al. 27 101 2.0% 4.0% 11.9%
Marin Gabriel et al. 29 25 28.0% 24.0% 8.0%
Mathus‐Vliegen et al. 30 47 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 2.9% 0.0%
Rostom et al. 32 49 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 26.0%
Low‐volume
NaP Ainley et al. 22 100 26.0% 2.0% 0.0% 45.0% 16.0%
Beloosesky et al. 24 36 56.0% 14.0% 58.0%
Bitoun et al. 33 171 5.8% 5.8% 0.6%
Clarkston et al. 25 49 26.5% 98.0% 12.2%
Lieberman et al. 28 32 28.1% 6.3%
Marin Gabriel et al. 29 17 23.5% 5.9% 47.1% 12.9%
Mathus‐Vliegen et al. 30 47 0.0% 2.4% 2.4% 39.0% 5.0%
Rostom et al. 32 144 10.4% 0.0% 0.7% 6.3% 41.7%
PEG‐asc 2L Bitoun et al. 33 169 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
SPMC Klare et al. 27 99 1.0% 21.2% 6.1%

NaP, sodium phosphate; PEG, polyethylene glycol; PEG‐asc, polyethylene glycol ascorbic acid; SPMC, sodium picosulfate plus magnesium citrate.