This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
from$1.95
to$39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Ferlay J et al. (2004) GLOBOCAN 2002: cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide. IARC Cancer Base No 5. Lyon: IARC Press
Harewood GC et al. (2002) A prospective controlled assessment of factors influencing acceptance of screening colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 97: 3186–3194
Huppertz-Hauss G et al. (2005) Polyethylene glycol versus sodium phosphate in bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: a randomised trial. Endoscopy 37: 537–541
Rex DK et al. (2006) Safety and colon-cleansing efficacy of a new residue-free formulation of sodium phosphate tablets. Am J Gastroenterol 101: 2594–2604
Zwas FR et al. (1996) Colonic mucosal abnormalities associated with oral sodium phosphate solution. Gastrointest Endosc 43: 524–528
Acknowledgements
The synopsis was written by Rachel Jones, Associate Editor, Nature Clinical Practice.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The author declares no competing financial interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bretthauer, M. Are sodium phosphate tablets better than polyethylene glycol solution plus bisacodyl tablets for bowel preparation?. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 5, 296–297 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpgasthep1142
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpgasthep1142