Literature DB >> 10944065

Endomysium antibodies are superior to gliadin antibodies in screening for coeliac disease in patients presenting supposed functional gastrointestinal symptoms.

L Agréus1, K Svärdsudd, G Tibblin, B Lavö.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To study the accuracy of IgA- and IgC-gluten antibodies and endomysium antibodies as screening tools for endoscopy with small bowel biopsy for histologic diagnosing of coeliac disease.
DESIGN: Comparing serology with histologic examination--the "gold standard" for diagnosing coeliac disease. SETTINGS: 1. The municipality of Osthammar, Sweden. 2. The catchment area of the University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden. PATIENTS: 1. A random subsample (50 with dyspepsia, 50 with irritable bowel syndrome and 50 symptomless) of a representative sample from an adult Swedish general population (20-80 years; n = 1260). 2. All patients with a diagnosis of coeliac disease admitted to the University Hospital in Uppsala, Sweden during the course of 10 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The accuracy of IgA- and IgG-gluten antibodies and endomysium antibodies.
RESULTS: There were no significant correlations between IgA-gluten antibodies and IgG-gluten antibodies, on the one hand, and symptoms or symptom severity, on the other. Using duodenal biopsy results as the gold standard, IgA-gluten antibodies had a low specificity and IgG-gluten antibodies a low sensitivity, whereas endomysium antibodies had an excellent accuracy.
CONCLUSION: Endomysium antibodies seem to be the screening test of choice. The load of diagnostic upper endoscopies would be considerably decreased compared to using gluten antibodies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10944065     DOI: 10.1080/028134300750018990

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care        ISSN: 0281-3432            Impact factor:   2.581


  7 in total

1.  Quality not quantity for transglutaminase antibody 2: the performance of an endomysial and tissue transglutaminase test in screening coeliac disease remains stable over time.

Authors:  K Swallow; G Wild; R Sargur; D S Sanders; I Aziz; A D Hopper; W Egner
Journal:  Clin Exp Immunol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.330

2.  The prevalence of celiac disease among patients with nonconstipated irritable bowel syndrome is similar to controls.

Authors:  Brooks D Cash; Joel H Rubenstein; Patrick E Young; Andrew Gentry; Borko Nojkov; Dong Lee; A Hirsohi Andrews; Richard Dobhan; William D Chey
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2011-07-14       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  Detection of celiac disease and lymphocytic enteropathy by parallel serology and histopathology in a population-based study.

Authors:  Marjorie M Walker; Joseph A Murray; Jukka Ronkainen; Pertti Aro; Tom Storskrubb; Mauro D'Amato; Brian Lahr; Nicholas J Talley; Lars Agreus
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2010-04-13       Impact factor: 22.682

4.  Evidence Against Routine Testing of Patients With Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders for Celiac Disease: A Population-based Study.

Authors:  Rok Seon Choung; Alberto Rubio-Tapia; Brian D Lahr; Robert A Kyle; Michael J Camilleri; G Richard Locke; Nicholas J Talley; Joseph A Murray
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2015-05-16       Impact factor: 11.382

Review 5.  Screening for Celiac Disease in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Andrew J Irvine; William D Chey; Alexander C Ford
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-10-18       Impact factor: 10.864

6.  Health Benefits and Adverse Effects of a Gluten-Free Diet in Non-Celiac Disease Patients.

Authors:  Benjamin Niland; Brooks D Cash
Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y)       Date:  2018-02

7.  Coeliac disease-associated antibodies in psoriasis.

Authors:  Sabiye Akbulut; Günes Gür; Firdevs Topal; Engin Senel; Fatih Esad Topal; Nuran Alli; Ulkü Saritas
Journal:  Ann Dermatol       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 1.444

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.