4.5 Article

Clinical Implication of False-Positive Celiac Serology in Patients With Ileal Pouch

Journal

DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM
Volume 53, Issue 10, Pages 1446-1451

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181eba46c

Keywords

Celiac disease; Pouchitis; Restorative proctocolectomy; Serology

Funding

  1. Eli and Edyth Broad Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: In patients with symptoms of pouchitis retractable to antibiotic therapy, serology is often ordered to exclude concurrent celiac disease. The clinical utility of celiac serology in patients with ileal pouches is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical implications of false-positive celiac serology in patients with ileal pouches. METHODS: All patients with pouches who had underlying ulcerative colitis and available celiac serology were included from the subspecialty Pouchitis Clinic at the Cleveland Clinic between 2002 and 2007. Chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis was diagnosed based on persistent symptomatic pouchitis after a 4-week single- or dual-antibiotic therapy. RESULTS: A total of 126 patients were studied, and a false-positive celiac serology was observed in 19 patients. Chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis was diagnosed in 47% (9/19) of patients with false-positive celiac serology compared with 14% (15/107) of patients with a negative celiac serology (P = .003). In multivariate analysis, the association between false-positive celiac serology and chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis remained significant (odds ratio, 5.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-16.7; P = .004) after adjusting for sex (P = .03), pouch duration (P = .83), the presence of autoimmune disorders (P = .46), and extraintestinal manifestations (P = .63). CONCLUSION: False-positive celiac serology appeared to be common in patients with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and it may be associated with chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis.

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