4.5 Article

Progression of pediatric celiac disease from potential celiac disease to celiac disease: a retrospective cohort study

Journal

BMC PEDIATRICS
Volume 21, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12887-021-02625-z

Keywords

Celiac disease; Potential celiac disease; Pediatrics; Biopsy

Categories

Funding

  1. Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A subset of patients initially with negative biopsy for celiac disease later develop histopathologic celiac disease, with slower progression in some cases. Regular reassessment is recommended for children with serological signs of celiac disease despite normal small bowel biopsy results.
Background A subset of patients with serology suggesting celiac disease have an initially negative biopsy but subsequently develop histopathologic celiac disease. Here we characterize patients with potential celiac disease who progress to celiac disease. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of children (0-18 years of age) with biopsy-confirmed celiac disease seen at St. Louis Children's Hospital between 2013 and 2018. Results Three hundred sixteen of 327 (96%) children with biopsy-confirmed celiac disease were diagnosed on initial biopsy. The 11 children with potential celiac disease who progressed to celiac disease had lower anti-tissue transglutaminase (anti-TTG IgA) concentrations (2.4 (1.6-5) X upper limit of normal (ULN) vs. 6.41 (3.4-10.5) X ULN) at time of first biopsy. Their median anti-TTG IgA concentrations rose from 2.4 (1.6-5) X ULN to 3.6 (3.1-9.2) X ULN between biopsies. Conclusions Four percent of biopsy confirmed celiac patients initially had a negative biopsy, but later developed histopathologic celiac disease. This is likely an underestimate as no surveillance algorithm was in place. We recommend repeat assessment in children whose serology suggests celiac disease despite normal small bowel biopsy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available