Jump to content
  • Welcome to Celiac.com!

    You have found your celiac tribe! Join us and ask questions in our forum, share your story, and connect with others.




  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A1):



    Celiac.com Sponsor (A1-M):


  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Our Content
    eNewsletter
    Donate

gluten-free For Only Three Weeks. Will Biopsy Still Show Accurate Results?


Jhoward521

Recommended Posts

Jhoward521 Newbie

I have had severe abdominal pain for a couple months. So I tried gluten-free one day and two days later felt a change. I had blood work done about 10 days in and it showed positive for gluten intolerance. So the GI is now doing colonoscopy and endoscopy. I will be one day shy of 3 weeks gluten-free, with day 3 I have non gluten-free crackers. Other than that, gluten-free to the best of my knowledge. Can I still test positive for Celiacs if indeed I do have it? I have never eaten gluten-free in my life prior to these 3 weeks. I am imagining I still have plenty of gluten or damage to be seen in my system if that's the case.

I would love to hear back from people on this!!

P.S. I also rotate between constipation and loose bowels, I have the chicken skin arms they call it, borderline anemic, infertility issues.


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



kareng Grand Master

If it were me, I would want to be sure I get an accurate biopsy result and start eating a little gluten everyday. The superficial damage can heal quickly. Sure, you might have enough damage to get an accurate result. Make sure he plans to take at least 6 biopsies to increase the chances that he finds some damage. The intestines are around 20 feet long and a biopsy is tiny.

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Jhoward521 Newbie

If it were me, I would want to be sure I get an accurate biopsy result and start eating a little gluten everyday. The superficial damage can heal quickly. Sure, you might have enough damage to get an accurate result. Make sure he plans to take at least 6 biopsies to increase the chances that he finds some damage. The intestines are around 20 feet long and a biopsy is tiny.

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

I can't eat today. I have test tomorrow. :(

NoGlutenCooties Contributor

While it is recommended to continue to be consuming gluten when you get tested, the inflammation is spotty and can come-and-go so even while you're eating gluten you can potentially get a false negative result.  However, I think a false negative is less likely if you're eating gluten.  In my case, my blood test came back positive and I stopped eating gluten right away.  My biopsy was 3 weeks later and it showed visible inflammation and the biopsy came back with moderate to severe villi damage.  But everyone is different and I think it really depends on the timing and getting lucky enough to catch it during a flare up.  But in general, the antibodies do not go away immediately and it is the antibodies that are causing the damage.  It can take months or even a year or two for all of the antibodies to die off.  On the other hand, many people see a very noticeable improvement in symptoms just a week or two into a gluten free diet, which would suggest that the inflammation in the intestine is likely already starting to improve - which would effect the outcome of the tests.

 

I hope I didn't confuse you even further... the short answer is that it depends.  Hopefully now you have an idea of what it can depend on...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Celiac.com:
    Join eNewsletter
    Donate

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A17):
    Celiac.com Sponsor (A17):





    Celiac.com Sponsors (A17-M):




  • Recent Activity

    1. - Scott Adams replied to HAUS's topic in Gluten-Free Foods, Products, Shopping & Medications
      7

      Sainsbury's Free From White Sliced Bread - Now Egg Free - Completely Ruined It

    2. - Scott Adams replied to deanna1ynne's topic in Celiac Disease Pre-Diagnosis, Testing & Symptoms
      13

      Inconclusive results

    3. - deanna1ynne replied to deanna1ynne's topic in Celiac Disease Pre-Diagnosis, Testing & Symptoms
      13

      Inconclusive results

    4. - cristiana replied to HAUS's topic in Gluten-Free Foods, Products, Shopping & Medications
      7

      Sainsbury's Free From White Sliced Bread - Now Egg Free - Completely Ruined It


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      132,439
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    Lillian Steele
    Newest Member
    Lillian Steele
    Joined

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.5k
    • Total Posts
      1m

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):





  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):



  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • Scott Adams
      In the U.S., most regular wheat breads are required to be enriched with certain B-vitamins and iron, but gluten-free breads are not required to be. Since many gluten-free products are not enriched, we usually encourage people with celiac disease to consider a multivitamin.  In the early 1900s, refined white flour replaced whole grains, and people began developing serious vitamin-deficiency diseases: Beriberi → caused by a lack of thiamin (vitamin B1) Pellagra → caused by a lack of niacin (vitamin B3) Anemia → linked to low iron and lack of folate By the 1930s–40s, these problems were common in the U.S., especially in poorer regions. Public-health officials responded by requiring wheat flour and the breads made from it to be “enriched” with thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, and iron. Folic acid was added later (1998) to prevent neural-tube birth defects. Why gluten-free bread isn’t required to be enriched? The U.S. enrichment standards were written specifically for wheat flour. Gluten-free breads use rice, tapioca, corn, sorghum, etc.—so they fall outside that rule—but they probably should be for the same reason wheat products are.
    • Scott Adams
      Keep in mind that there are drawbacks to a formal diagnosis, for example more expensive life and private health insurance, as well as possibly needing to disclose it on job applications. Normally I am in favor of the formal diagnosis process, but if you've already figured out that you can't tolerate gluten and will likely stay gluten-free anyway, I wanted to at least mention the possible negative sides of having a formal diagnosis. While I understand wanting a formal diagnosis, it sounds like she will likely remain gluten-free either way, even if she should test negative for celiac disease (Approximately 10x more people have non-celiac gluten sensitivity than have celiac disease, but there isn’t yet a test for NCGS. If her symptoms go away on a gluten-free diet, it would likely signal NCGS).        
    • JoJo0611
    • deanna1ynne
      Thank you all so much for your advice and thoughts. We ended up having another scope and more bloodwork last week. All serological markers continue to increase, and the doc who did the scope said there villous atrophy visible on the scope — but we just got the biopsy pathology report back, and all it says is, “Duodenal mucosa with patchy increased intraepithelial lymphocytes, preserved villous architecture, and patchy foveolar metaplasia,” which we are told is still inconclusive…  We will have her go gluten free again anyway, but how soon would you all test again, if at all? How valuable is an official dx in a situation like this?
    • cristiana
      Thanks for this Russ, and good to see that it is fortified. I spend too much time looking for M&S gluten-free Iced Spiced Buns to have ever noticed this! That's interesting, Scott.  Have manufacturers ever said why that should be the case?  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

NOTICE: This site places This site places cookies on your device (Cookie settings). on your device. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.