4 ms·
>> the person has symptoms provoked by gluten, but they don’t have evidence of celiac disease Sigh, it would be useful to know what specific tests for celiac w
by itronitron 2y ago
>> the person has symptoms provoked by gluten, but they don’t have evidence of celiac disease
Sigh, it would be useful to know what specific tests for celiac were performed that came back inconclusive or even just stating what doctors consider to be definitive evidence of celiac disease.
- macobrien 2y agoWhen I was diagnosed back in the mid 00s, the tests were: - A blood test for elevated levels of tTG-IgA antibodies, which are produced by the celiac autoimmune reaction. This has something like a 5% false negative and 10% false positive rate, so it's generally a strong indicator but doesn't totally confirm the diagnosis. - An EGD/biopsy of the small intestine. The lining of the small intestine is damaged by anti-tTG antibodies in a way that's recognizable under a microscope.
- ben7799 2y agoIf you're in an area with excellent health care any GI doctor should be able to explain that the blood test can be conclusive for a positive but not for a negative. If there is any question they should be doing an endoscopy and taking a biopsy of the small intestine. Celiac disease causes the body to destroy villi and they can see that under the microscope.
- BostonFern 2y agoAs does tropical sprue, Crohn’s, and a host of other infections and autoimmune diseases.
- Miner49er 2y agoSounds like a standard celiac blood panel. Definite evidence is both a positive blood test and villous atrophy found by taking biopsies of the small intestine.