Introduction: To review the available evidence for the relative efficacy and safety of enteral versus intravenous rehydration therapy in treating childhood gastroenteritis Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (to June 2003), were searched for randomised trials comparing enteral and intravenous therapy in children under 15 years of age with gastroenteritis. Known investigators and expert bodies were contacted to locate unpublished and ongoing studies. Review methods: Two reviewers independently identified studies and extracted data from eligible studies, which were then combined using a random effects model. Results: 16 trials involving 1545 children and conducted in 11 countries were identified. Compared with children treated with intravenous rehydration, children treated with oral rehydration had significantly fewer major adverse events including death or seizures (Relative Risk=0.36; 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 0.89) and had a significant reduction in length of hospital stay (21 hours: 95% CI 5 to 35). There was no difference in weight gain between the two groups (– 26 grams; 95% CI – 61 to 10). The overall failure rate of enteral therapy was 4.0% (95% CI 3.0 to 5.0). Conclusion: For childhood gastroenteritis, enteral rehydration is as effective, if not better than intravenous rehydration. Enteral rehydration by the oral or nasogastric route is associated with significantly fewer major adverse events and a shorter stay in hospital compared with intravenous therapy and is successful in the majority of children. Practitioners who manage this condition need to address the obstacles, which currently prevent a wider acceptance and usage of enteral rehydration. Reference(S): Supplied on request