Duodenal bulb in celiac adults: the "whether biopsying" dilemma

Role of Duodenal Bulb Biopsy in Diagnosing Suspected Celiac Disease in Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Current guidelines recommend multiple biopsies from the first (D1) and second (D2) part of duodenum to establish a diagnosis of celiac disease. In this meta-analysis we aimed to find whether D1 biopsy can increase the diagnostic yield of adult celiac disease.

METHODS

Literature databases were searched until January 2023 for studies reporting diagnosis of celiac disease in the adult population using D1 biopsy. Meta-analysis was done using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by I 2 % and 95% prediction interval statistics. Measured outcomes were diagnostic yield with D1 and D2 biopsies and from 4 versus 2 biopsy samples.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies were included in the final analysis. The pooled diagnostic rate of celiac disease from D1 biopsy was 77.4% [95% CI (64.7-86.5, I 2 94%)] and from D2 biopsy was 75.3% [60.8-85.7, I 2 96%]. The pooled rate of increase in diagnostic yield with D1 biopsy was 6.9% I [4.6-10.2, I 2 66%]. The pooled diagnosis rate with 2 biopsy samples were 77.3% [50-92, I 2 93%] and 86.4% I [58.4-96.7, I 2 87%] from D1 and D2 respectively, whereas that with 4 biopsy samples were 83.3% [49.8-96.2, I 2 76%] and 70.5% I [51-84.6, I 2 96%] from D1 and D2, respectively, the difference being non-significant.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates that taking 4 biopsy samples does not incur any additional diagnostic value over taking 2 biopsy samples from each duodenum segment. Although biopsy from the D1 and D2 has similar diagnostic yield in the adult population, there was an overall increase in diagnostic yield with D1 biopsy, especially in those with a patchy disease distribution.

Duodenal bulb biopsy in the diagnostic work-up of coeliac disease

Coeliac disease (CD) is an autoimmune enteropathy which can present with patchy mucosal lesions. The aim of the present study is to investigate the significance of duodenal bulb biopsy in the diagnostic work-up of CD in both pediatric and adult patients, and to highlight the key points for pathologists. D1 (duodenal bulb) and D2 (distal duodenum) biopsies of 153 newly diagnosed serology-positive CD patients were evaluated for villous/crypt ratio and intraepithelial lymphocyte (IEL) counts on CD3-stained slides and were classified according to Marsh. Mucosal pathology was patchy in 15% (13% only D1 and 2% only D2) of patients, and 85% of patients had diffuse mucosal pathology involving both D1 and D2 biopsies which showed concordant histology in 60% and discordant in 25% of the cases. Though majority of the patients (75%) with only D1 involvement were pediatric cases, no significant difference was found between pediatric and adult patients when all cases were considered (17 vs 14%). Our results clearly indicate that without D1 sampling, diagnosis of CD would have been missed in a significant number of cases (13%), thereby highlighting the importance of taking duodenal biopsies from multiple sites in the diagnostic work-up of CD. We, therefore, conclude that every biopsy piece from both D1 and D2 should be carefully evaluated for the whole spectrum of mucosal changes caused by gluten ingestion and classified using a scheme based on Marsh to allow recognition of mild lesions.

Efficacy of duodenal bulb biopsy for diagnosis of celiac disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Although duodenal biopsy is considered the "gold standard" for diagnosis of celiac disease, the optimal location of biopsy within the small bowel for diagnosis remains unclear. The primary aim of this study was to perform a structured systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic utility of endoscopic duodenal bulb biopsy for celiac disease. Patients and methods  Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were performed from 2000 through December 2017. Review of titles/abstracts, full review of potentially relevant studies, and data abstraction was performed. Measured outcomes of adult and pediatric patients included location of biopsy, mean number of biopsies performed, and diagnosis of celiac disease as defined by the modified Marsh-Oberhuber classification. Results  A total of 17 studies (n = 4050) were included. Seven studies evaluated adults and 11 studies assessed pediatric populations. Mean age of adults and pediatric patients was 46.70 ± 2.69 and 6.33 ± 1.26 years, respectively. Overall, sampling from the duodenal bulb demonstrated a 5 % (95 % CI 3 - 9; P  < 0.001) increase in the diagnostic yield of celiac disease. When stratified by pediatric and adult populations, duodenal bulb biopsy demonstrated a 4 % (95 % CI: 1 to 9; P  < 0.001) and 8 % (95 % CI: 6 to 10; P  < 0.001) increase in the diagnostic yield of celiac disease. Non-celiac histologic diagnoses including Brunner gland hyperplasia and peptic duodenitis were reported more commonly in the duodenal bulb as compared to the distal duodenum with an increase in diagnostic yield of 4 % (95 % CI 3 - 5; P  < 0.001) and 1 % (95 % CI 1 - 2; P  < 0.001), respectively. Conclusions  Based upon our results, biopsy and histologic examination of duodenal bulb during routine upper endoscopy increases the diagnostic yield of celiac disease.

Analysis of Biopsies From Duodenal Bulbs of All Endoscopy Patients Increases Detection of Abnormalities but has a Minimal Effect on Diagnosis of Celiac Disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In patients with positive results from serologic tests for celiac disease, analysis of tissues samples from the duodenal bulb, in addition to those from other parts of the small bowel, might increase the diagnostic yield. However, biopsies are not routinely collected from the duodenal bulb because of concerns that villous atrophy detected there could be caused by other disorders (Brunner glands or peptic duodenitis, gastric metaplasia, shorter villi, or lymphoid follicles). We investigated whether analysis of biopsies from duodenal bulbs of all patients undergoing endoscopy (a population with a low probability for celiac disease) increases diagnoses of celiac disease.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of data from 679 patients (63% female; mean age, 50 years) from whom duodenal bulb and small bowel biopsies were collected during endoscopy at 3 Mayo Clinic sites, from January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2011. Records were reviewed for age, sex, pathology findings, serology test results (HLA DQ2 or DQ), indications for biopsy analyses, and adherence to a gluten-free diet. Patients with celiac disease were identified on the basis of increased intraepithelial lymphocytosis, with or without villous atrophy and crypt hyperplasia, and results from serology tests. Findings from duodenal bulbs were compared with diagnoses using the Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

Of all patients undergoing endoscopy, 16 patients (2%) were found to have celiac disease. Analysis of the duodenal bulb biopsies identified 1 patient (0.1%) with celiac disease limited to this region. Of 399 patients whose celiac serology was not known before endoscopic examination, only 2 patients had histologic changes consistent with celiac disease but not limited to duodenal bulb. Abnormal duodenal histology was detected in 265 patients (39%), most commonly in the bulb (n = 241; P < .0001). Of abnormal bulb histologies, chronic peptic duodenitis was most common (observed in 114 patients, 47%). In patients with a normal distal duodenum (n = 576), the duodenal bulb had abnormal histology in 162 (28%).

CONCLUSIONS

In a low pretest probability cohort, separate sampling of the duodenal bulb had minimal effect on celiac disease detection. Abnormal histologic findings are more commonly detected in the duodenal bulb; although they do not seem to impair identification of celiac disease, their clinical implications are unclear.

Celiac Disease: Diagnostic Standards and Dilemmas

Celiac Disease (CD) affects at least 1% of the population and evidence suggests that prevalence is increasing. The diagnosis of CD depends on providers being alert to both typical and atypical presentations and those situations in which patients are at high risk for the disease. Because of variable presentation, physicians need to have a low threshold for celiac testing. Robust knowledge of the pathogenesis of this autoimmune disease has served as a catalyst for the development of novel diagnostic tools. Highly sensitive and specific serological assays including Endomysial Antibody (EMA), tissue transglutaminase (tTG), and Deamidated Gliadin Peptide (DGP) have greatly simplified testing for CD and serve as the foundation for celiac diagnosis. In addition, genetic testing for HLA DQ2 and DQ8 has become more widely available and there has been refinement of the gluten challenge for use in diagnostic algorithms. While diagnosis is usually straightforward, in special conditions including IgA deficiency, very young children, discrepant histology and serology, and adoption of a gluten free diet prior to testing, CD can be difficult to diagnose. In this review, we provide an overview of the history and current state of celiac disease diagnosis and provide guidance for evaluation of CD in difficult diagnostic circumstances.

Assessing of Celiac Disease and Nonceliac Gluten Sensitivity

The publication of papers on the topic of gluten related disorders has substantially increased over the last few years. This has motivated healthcare professionals to pay attention not only to celiac disease and wheat allergy but also to a condition termed nonceliac gluten sensitivity (NCGS). Until now this condition has been diagnosed clinically on the basis of exclusion criteria and clinical response to gluten withdrawal. In addition, recent research in this field has shown that other food components distinct from gluten are implicated in NCGS cases, thereby changing our general understanding of NCGS diagnosis in either individuals on gluten containing diets or those already following a gluten-free diet with no proper diagnostic work-up of celiac disease. With this in mind, the assessment of NCGS will require extensive knowledge of celiac disease manifestations and the laboratory tests commonly performed during diagnosis of celiac disease.

Celiac disease or non-celiac gluten sensitivity? An approach to clinical differential diagnosis

OBJECTIVES

Differentiating between celiac disease (CD) and non-celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) is important for appropriate management but is often challenging.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed records from 238 patients who presented for the evaluation of symptoms responsive to gluten restriction without prior diagnosis or exclusion of CD. Demographics, presenting symptoms, serologic, genetic, and histologic data, nutrient deficiencies, personal history of autoimmune diseases, and family history of CD were recorded. NCGS was defined as symptoms responsive to a gluten-free diet (GFD) in the setting of negative celiac serology and duodenal biopsies while on a gluten-containing diet or negative human leukocyte antigen (HLA) DQ2/DQ8 testing.

RESULTS

Of the 238 study subjects, 101 had CD, 125 had NCGS, 9 had non-celiac enteropathy, and 3 had indeterminate diagnosis. CD subjects presented with symptoms of malabsorption 67.3% of the time compared with 24.8% of the NCGS subjects (P<0.0001). In addition, CD subjects were significantly more likely to have a family history of CD (P=0.004), personal history of autoimmune diseases (P=0.002), or nutrient deficiencies (P<0.0001). The positive likelihood ratio for diagnosis of CD of a >2× upper limit of normal IgA trans-glutaminase antibody (tTG) or IgA/IgG deaminated gliadan peptide antibody (DGP) with clinical response to GFD was 130 (confidence interval (CI): 18.5-918.3). The positive likelihood ratio of the combination of gluten-responsive symptoms and negative IgA tTG or IgA/IgG DGP on a regular diet for NCGS was 9.6 (CI: 5.5-16.9). When individuals with negative IgA tTG or IgA/IgG DGP also lacked symptoms of malabsorption (weight loss, diarrhea, and nutrient deficiencies) and CD risk factors (personal history of autoimmune diseases and family history of CD), the positive likelihood ratio for NCGS increased to 80.9.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of our findings, we have developed a diagnostic algorithm to differentiate CD from NCGS. Subjects with negative celiac serologies (IgA tTG or IgA/IgG DGP) on a regular diet are unlikely to have CD. Those with negative serology who also lack clinical evidence of malabsorption and CD risk factors are highly likely to have NCGS and may not require further testing. Those with equivocal serology should undergo HLA typing to determine the need for biopsy.

A practical approach to small bowel biopsy interpretation: celiac disease and its mimics

While celiac disease is the most common cause of villous remodeling and intraepithelial lymphocytosis in the proximal small bowel, there are many entities that can mimic its histologic appearance. The purpose of this review is to discuss normal small bowel histology and the differential diagnosis of celiac disease. Approaches to evaluate increased intraepithelial lymphocytes are presented, followed by a detailed discussion of the pathology of celiac disease. Particular emphasis is given to those conditions that cause intraepithelial lymphocytosis in the setting of preserved villous architecture, although other important entities, such as peptic injury, idiopathic inflammatory bowel disease, medication injury, eosinophilic (allergic) gastroenteritis, autoimmune enteropathy, common variable immunodeficiency, and infections are also reviewed.

An orthodontic retainer preventing remission in celiac disease

Celiac disease is a gluten enteropathy that is treated with dietary elimination of gluten. Exposure to nondietary sources of gluten, which are used in the manufacture of products such as plastics, dental equipment, and cosmetics, can also trigger or exacerbate disease. We report the case of a 9-year-old child who presented with nonspecific abdominal discomfort with abnormal serology for celiac disease. She underwent duodenal biopsies that revealed Marsh 3B histopathology. Despite strict dietary elimination of gluten, she continued to be symptomatic and demonstrate positive serum markers for active disease. It was then discovered that the child was exposed to gluten from her orthodontic retainer that contained a plasticized methacrylate polymer. Gluten is a common additive in plastics. She discontinued its use and demonstrated symptom resolution and complete normalization of serology. All possible sources of gluten, including nondietary, must be considered when managing a child with celiac disease.

Anti-transglutaminase immunoreactivity and histological lesions of the duodenum in coeliac patients

Coeliac disease (CD) is characterized by several markers, including anti-transglutaminase auto-antibodies (tTGAb) directed against multiple epitopes of the gliadin protein. We aimed to investigate the correlation among CD duodenal lesions, tTGAb titres and the immunoreactivity against tTG constructs. A total of 345 CD patients (209 females, 136 males, overall median age: 7.3 years) were tested for full-length (fl) tTGAb with a fluid-phase radioimmunoassay. Out of the total, 231 patients were also tested for immunoreactivity against tTG fragments (F1: a.a. 227-687 and F2: a.a. 473-687). Patients were classified according to diffuse (D), patchy (P) or bulb (B) histological lesions. All sera were found fltTGAb positive. Patients with D, P and B lesions had a mean Ab index of 0.84±0.39, 0.57±0.39 and 0.45±0.24, respectively. Mean tTGAb titre varied between D and localized (P+B) patients (0.84±0.39 versus 0.52±0.34, P < 0.0001). Overall, 86.1% of patients were F1 auto-antibody (F1Ab) positive (D: 89%, P: 75%, B: 40%; D versus P+B: P = 0.004) and 49% of patients were F2 auto-antibody (F2Ab) positive (D: 53%, P: 19%, B: 10%; D versus P+B: P = 0.0006). Of the D patients 50.7% showed combined F1Ab-F2Ab (D versus P+B: P = 0.001), whereas 60% of B patients were negative for both F1Ab and F2Ab (B versus D: P < 0.0001). Coeliac-specific tTGAb immunoreactivity correlates with the grading and extension of histological duodenal lesions in CD patients at diagnosis. The immunoreactivity against single and combined tTG fragments is significantly higher in patients with D lesions. This is the first evidence of a distinct coeliac-specific immunoreactivity in patients with different duodenal involvement.

Low prevalence of coeliac disease in patients with systemic sclerosis: a cross-sectional study of a registry cohort

OBJECTIVES

Two prior studies suggested that coeliac disease (CD) has a higher prevalence rate (8%) in SSc than in the general population (1%), but these studies were limited by small numbers and the use of traditional coeliac screening antibody tests, where newer ones with improved accuracy have since emerged. Our aim was to determine the prevalence of CD in a larger SSc population using a more modern serological approach to coeliac testing and to correlate coeliac antibody status with gastrointestinal symptoms.

METHODS

Stored sera from 72 SSc patients in the Scleroderma Registry at the Hospital for Special Surgery were tested for anti-tissue transglutaminase (traditional) and anti-deamidated gliadin peptide (novel) antibodies. If any of these antibodies were positive, anti-endomysial antibodies were tested and confirmatory small-bowel endoscopy and biopsy were obtained. Registry clinical data were used to determine whether antibody status correlated with gastrointestinal symptoms.

RESULTS

The prevalence of coeliac antibodies in our SSc population was 3/72 (4%). No significant differences with respect to gastrointestinal symptoms were seen in the coeliac antibody-positive compared with -negative SSc patients. No cases of confirmed CD were seen in our cohort.

CONCLUSION

Contrary to the only two previously published studies, the low prevalence of CD that we found does not suggest that concurrent CD is a common cause of gastrointestinal complaints in SSc patients.