Eight studies (n=277), five of which were double-blind, were included in the analysis. No significant differences (random-effects model) in diagnostic yield were reported for CE and DBE, but there was some evidence of significant statistical heterogeneity (I2=59.8%). A subgroup analysis according to the insertion approach used for DBE showed that the diagnostic yield of CE was significantly higher than that of the separate approaches for DBE (OR 1.67, 95% CI: 1.14, 2.44; I2=0%; fixed-effect model). When the two approaches (oral and anal) were combined, a non significant difference in favour of combined DBE was found (random-effects model), but there was evidence of significant heterogeneity (I2=75.5%).
No adverse events were reported.
Funnel plots suggested that there was no risk of publication bias.