Anzeige
Erschienen in:
17.07.2017 | Original Article
Application of the Biopsy-Sparing ESPGHAN Guidelines for Celiac Disease Diagnosis in Adults: A Real-Life Study
Erschienen in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences | Ausgabe 9/2017
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhaltenAbstract
Background
Current adult celiac disease diagnosis requires histological confirmation. However, pediatric guidelines have proposed biopsy-sparing algorithms.
Aims
To explore the applicability of the ESPGHAN criteria and assess the accuracy of serology in predicting disease in adults.
Methods
We evaluated 234 consecutive adults showing elevated anti-tTG titers, EMA-positivity, and genetic susceptibility. Patients underwent upper endoscopy with duodenal biopsy. We determined optimal anti-tTG cutoff levels using ROC curves.
Results
Mean anti-tTG levels were 71.1 ± 66.5 U/ml; mean normalized levels were 14.8 ± 14.1 × ULN (mean ± SD). Partial/total villous atrophy was present in 36%/55% of cases, respectively. Anti-tTG levels correlated with histology (r
s = 0.397, p < 0.001). AUC was similar before and after normalization (0.803 vs 0.807). Applying the ESPGHAN criterion (≥10 × ULN), we calculated a 97.66% PPV. ROC curve analysis showed an optimal cutoff of ≥16 × ULN, with a PPV of 98.86%. Eleven different assays were used for anti-tTG titer determination: Two were prevalent, labeled A (n = 141) and B (n = 59). They performed differently regarding disease prediction (AUC = 0.689 vs 0.925, p < 0.01), showing distinct optimal cutoff values (14.3 × ULN vs 3.7 × ULN), even after standardization (−0.14 vs −1.2).
Conclusion
In adult symptomatic patients showing EMA-positivity and genetic susceptibility, anti-tTG titers correlated with histology. ESPGHAN criteria performed similarly to previous studies. However, a calculated 16 × ULN cutoff showed an improved PPV. Among prevalent assays, PPV peaked differently both after normalization and standardization, indicating intrinsic differences in performance, thus preventing uniform prediction of disease in a real-life setting. Assay-specific optimal cutoffs seem possible, but would complicate diagnostic criteria. However, biopsy-sparing strategies in adults could prove useful in challenging patients.