Download PDF
Endoscopy 2014; 46(02): 110-119
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1359200
Original article
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Prediction of celiac disease at endoscopy

Kassem Barada
1   Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
,
Robert H. Habib
1   Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
5   Outcomes Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon
,
Ahmad Malli
1   Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
,
Jana G. Hashash
1   Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
,
Houssam Halawi
1   Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
,
Karim Maasri
1   Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
,
Ayman Tawil
2   Department of Pathology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
,
Fadi Mourad
1   Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
,
Ala I. Sharara
1   Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
,
Assaad Soweid
1   Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
,
Ismail Sukkarieh
1   Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
,
Zaher Chakhachiro
2   Department of Pathology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
,
Mark Jabbour
2   Department of Pathology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
,
Alessio Fasano
3   Department of Pediatrics, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Debbie Santora
3   Department of Pediatrics, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
,
Carolina Arguelles
4   Department of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, USA
,
Joseph A. Murray
6   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
,
Peter H. Green
4   Department of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, USA
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

submitted: 03 March 2013

accepted after revision: 11 19 2013

Publication Date:
29 January 2014 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Background and study aims: Celiac disease is increasingly recognized worldwide, but guidelines on how to detect the condition and diagnose patients are unclear. In this study the prevalence and predictors of celiac disease were prospectively determined in a cross-sectional sample of Lebanese patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD).

Patients and methods: Consecutive consenting patients (n = 999) undergoing EGD answered a questionnaire and had blood taken for serologic testing. Endoscopic markers for celiac disease were documented and duodenal biopsies were obtained. The diagnosis of celiac disease was based on abnormal duodenal histology and positive serology. Risk factors were used to classify patients to either high or low risk for celiac disease. Independent predictors of celiac disease were derived via multivariate logistic regression.

Results: Villous atrophy (Marsh 3) and celiac disease were present in 1.8 % and 1.5 % of patients, respectively. Most were missed on clinical and endoscopic grounds. The sensitivity of tissue transglutaminase (tTG) testing for the diagnosis of villous atrophy and celiac disease was 72.2 % and 86.7 %, respectively. The positive predictive value of the deamidated gliadin peptide (DGP) test was 34.2 % and that of a strongly positive tTG was 80 %. While the strongest predictor of celiac disease was a positive tTG (odds ratio [OR] 131.7, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 29.0 – 598.6), endoscopic features of villous atrophy (OR 64.8, 95 %CI 10.7 – 391.3), history of eczema (OR 4.6, 95 %CI 0.8 – 28.8), anemia (OR 6.7, 95 %CI 1.2 – 38.4), and being Shiite (OR 5.4, 95 %CI 1.1 – 26.6) significantly predicted celiac disease. A strategy of biopsying the duodenum based on independent predictors had a sensitivity of 93 % – 100 % for the diagnosis of celiac disease, with an acceptable (22 % – 26 %) rate of performing unnecessary biopsies. A strategy that excluded pre-EGD serology produced a sensitivity of 93 % – 94 % and an unnecessary biopsy rate of 52 %.

Conclusion: An approach based solely on standard clinical suspicion and endoscopic findings is associated with a significant miss rate for celiac disease. A strategy to biopsy based on the derived celiac disease prediction models using easily obtained information prior to or during endoscopy, maximized the diagnosis while minimizing unnecessary biopsies.

 

  • References

  • 1 National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement on Celiac Disease. Gastroenterology 2005; 128: 1-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Green PH, Cellier C. Celiac disease. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 1731-1743
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Green PHR, Stavropoulos SN, Panagi SG et al. Characteristics of adult celiac disease in the USA: results of a national survey. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96: 126-131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Di Sabatino A, Corazza GR. Coeliac disease. Lancet 2009; 373: 1480-1493
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Green PH. Where are all those patients with celiac disease?. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102: 1461-1463
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Bardella MT, Minoli G, Ravizza D et al. Increased prevalence of celiac disease in patients with dyspepsia. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160: 1489-1491
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Ozaslan E, Akkorlu S, Eskioglu E et al. Prevalence of silent celiac disease in patients with dyspepsia. Dig Dis Sci 2007; 52: 692-697
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Giangreco E, D’agate C, Barbera C et al. Prevalence of celiac disease in adult patients with refractory functional dyspepsia: Value of routine duodenal biopsy. World J Gastroenterol 2008; 14: 6948-6953
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Locke 3rd GR, Murray JA et al. Celiac disease serology in irritable bowel syndrome and dyspepsia: a population-based case–control study. Mayo Clin Proc 2004; 79: 476-482
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Collin P, Rasmussen M, Kyronpalo S et al. The hunt for coeliac disease in primary care. QJM 2002; 95: 75-77
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Nachman F, Vázquez H, González A et al. Gastroesophageal reflux symptoms in patients with celiac disease and the effects of a gluten-free diet. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 9: 214-219
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Dickey W. Diagnosis of coeliac disease at open-access endoscopy. Scand J Gastroenterol 1998; 33: 612-615
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Dickey W, Hughes D. Prevalence of celiac disease and its endoscopic markers among patients having routine upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 1999; 94: 2182-2186
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Kori M, Gladish V, Ziv-Sokolovskaya N et al. The significance of routine duodenal biopsies in pediatric patients undergoing upper intestinal endoscopy. J Clin Gastroenterol 2003; 37: 39-41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hopper AD, Cross SS, Hurlstone DP et al. Pre-endoscopy serological testing for coeliac disease: evaluation of a clinical decision tool. BMJ 2007; 334: 729
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Biagi F, Corazza GR. Mortality in celiac disease. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010; 7: 158-162
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Leffler DA, Schuppan D. Update on serologic testing in celiac disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 2520-2524
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Chand N, Mihas A. Celiac disease: current concepts in diagnosis and treatment. J Clin Gastroenterol 2006; 40: 3-14
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Green PH, Jabri B. Celiac disease. Annu Rev Med 2006; 57: 207-221
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Lee S, Green PH. Endoscopy in celiac disease. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 2005; 21: 589-594
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Oxentenko AS, Grisolano SW, Murray JA et al. The insensitivity of endoscopic markers in celiac disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 933-938
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Cammarota G, Fedeli P, Gasbarrini A. Emerging technologies in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and celiac disease. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 6: 47-56
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Dickey W, McConnell JB. How many hospital visits does it take before celiac sprue is diagnosed?. J Clin Gastroenterol 1996; 23: 21-23
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Lebwohl B, Tennyson CA, Holub JL et al. Sex and racial disparities in duodenal biopsy to evaluate for celiac disease. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 779-785
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Walker MM, Murray JA, Ronkainen J et al. Detection of celiac disease and lymphocytic enteropathy by parallel serology and histopathology in a population-based study. Gastroenterology 2010; 139: 112-119
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ciacci C, Cavallaro R, Iovino P et al. Allergy prevalence in adult celiac disease. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2004; 113: 1199-1203
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Dickey W. Endoscopic markers for celiac disease. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006; 3: 546-551
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Tursi A, Brandimarte G, Giorgetti G et al. Low prevalence of antigliadin and anti-endomysium antibodies in subclinical/silent celiac disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96: 1507-1510
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Rostami K, Kerckhaert J, Tiemessen R et al. Sensitivity of antiendomysium and antigliadin antibodies in untreated celiac disease: disappointing in clinical practice. Am J Gastroenterol 1999; 94: 888-894
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Rashtak S, Ettore MW, Homburger HA al. Comparative usefulness of deamidated gliadin antibodies in the diagnosis of celiac disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008; 6: 426-432
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Donaldson MR, Book LS, Leiferman KM et al. Strongly positive tissue transglutaminase antibodies are associated with Marsh 3 histopathology in adult and pediatric celiac disease. J Clin Gastroenterol 2008; 42: 256-260
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Hill PG, Holmes GK. Coeliac disease: a biopsy is not always necessary for diagnosis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2008; 27: 572-577
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Teresi S, Crapisi M, Vallejo MD et al. Celiac disease seropositivity in Saharawi children: a follow-up and family study. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2010; 50: 506-509
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Nisticò L, Fagnani C, Coto I et al. Concordance, disease progression, and heritability of coeliac disease in Italian twins. Gut 2006; 55: 803-808
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Dubé C, Rostom A, Sy R et al. The prevalence of celiac disease in average-risk and at-risk Western European populations: a systematic review. Gastroenterology 2005; 128 (04) 57-67
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Mustalahi K, Catassi C, Reunanen A et al. The prevalence of celiac disease in Europe: results of a centralized, international mass screening project. Ann Med 2010; 42: 587-595
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar