If your biopsy comes back fine—congratulations, you’re not suffering the inflammation and villous atrophy that most of us have had to deal with!However if the “optics” of your endoscopy suggested celiac disease, your biopsies will likely confirm this. IF you’ve stuck to a gluten-inclusive diet (have you?)If you have some optical change in your gut, but a clean biopsy, there are a variety of other conditions that may cause some inflammation or visual difference in the proximal gut, all of which are treatable & manageable. Your doctor should have next diagnostic steps for you if that is the case. There are also a number of “functional” disorders, which mean that though you’re experiencing frustrating symptoms, there’s no damage in your gut. Again, these are treatable.Glad to hear the procedures were no big deal. I’m sure Joan Rivers was having a more complex procedure—and was also eighty-plus! We live in a good time, inasmuch as the sedative drugs used for these procedures are safe and very effective. I’ve had two endos in two months, and likely another one this year; I’ve learned to shrug them off. Last time I got mad at my GI for not sedating me enough!!
A negative biopsy does not rule out Celiac Disease. If there is inflammation of the small intestine or changes that can be seen with the naked eye, it very well still could be Celiac, regardless of a negative biopsy. Patchy damage is patchy damage and this is where people get bad info from doctors when they don't hit the right spot.
If the biopsy comes back negative for Celiac, the next step would be to do a gluten free trial and have genetic testing done, to see if it's even possible to have the genetics to trip for the disease. There may also be signs of early damage from Celiac, such as increased numbers of IEL's or scalloping of the duodenum. All of this should be taken into account before excluding Celiac.