title: A meta-analysis of the yield of capsule endoscopy compared to double-balloon enteroscopy in patients with small bowel diseases.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare the diagnostic yield of capsule endoscopy (CE) with that of double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE).
  
  
  METHODS
  Pubmed, Embase, Elsevier ScienceDirect, the China Academic Journals Full-text Database, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched for the trials comparing the yield of CE with that of DBE. Outcome measure was odds ratio (OR) of the yield. Fixed or random model method was used for data analysis.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Eight studies (n = 277) which prospectively compared the yield of CE and DBE were collected. The results of meta-analysis indicated that there was no difference between the yield of CE and DBE [170/277 vs 156/277, OR 1.21 (95% CI: 0.64-2.29)]. Based on sub analysis, the yield of CE was significantly higher than that of double-balloon enteroscopy without combination of oral and anal insertion approaches [137/219 vs 110/219, OR 1.67 (95% CI: 1.14-2.44), P < 0.01), but not superior to the yield of DBE with combination of the two insertion approaches [26/48 vs 37/48, OR 0.33 (95% CI: 0.05-2.21), P > 0.05)]. A focused meta-analysis of the fully published articles concerning obscure GI bleeding was also performed and showed similar results wherein the yield of CE was significantly higher than that of DBE without combination of oral and anal insertion approaches [118/191 vs 96/191, fixed model: OR 1.61 (95% CI: 1.07-2.43), P < 0.05)] and the yield of CE was significantly lower than that of DBE by oral and anal combinatory approaches [11/24 vs 21/24, fixed model: OR 0.12 (95% CI: 0.03-0.52), P < 0.01)].
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  With combination of oral and anal approaches, the yield of DBE might be at least as high as that of CE. Decisions made regarding the initial approach should depend on patient's physical status, technology availability, patient's preferences, and potential for therapeutic endoscopy.
authors: Department of gastroenterology, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai Institute of Digestive Disease, Shanghai 200001, China.
authors: Xiang
authors: X
authors: Chen
authors: Zhi-Hua
authors: ZH
authors: Ran
authors: Jin-Lu
authors: JL
authors: Tong
mesh_terms: D053704:Capsule Endoscopy / Q000379:methods*; D002404:Catheterization; D016099:Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal / Q000379:methods*; D006471:Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000473:pathology; D006801:Humans; D007410:Intestinal Diseases / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000473:pathology; D007421:Intestine, Small / Q000473:pathology
references: Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Sep;101(9):2016-24
references: 16968508
references: Endoscopy. 2005 Sep;37(9):827-32
references: 16116533
references: Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Jul;62(1):62-70
references: 15990821
references: Endoscopy. 2006 Jan;38(1):49-58
references: 16429355
references: Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2004 Sep;7(3):130-5
references: 16015557
references: Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Nov;64(5):740-50
references: 17055868
references: Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Jul;62(1):71-5
references: 15990822
references: Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2006 Feb;20(1):179-94
references: 16473807
references: Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 1999 Jan;9(1):61-9
references: 9834317
references: Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2005 Sep;21(5):573-7
references: 16093772
references: Am J Gastroenterol. 2005 Nov;100(11):2407-18
references: 16279893
references: Endoscopy. 2003 Oct;35(10):861-4
references: 14551867
references: Endoscopy. 2006 Jan;38(1):59-66
references: 16429356
references: Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Jan;101(1):52-7
references: 16405533