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

Worried About Getting An "official Diagnosis"


bakergirl90

Recommended Posts

bakergirl90 Apprentice

Hello everyone, 

 

So I was told I have Celiac disease by my doctor about 3 weeks ago. (From a blood test, two of the tests for celiac came back positive)

I had been suffering from pretty bad symptoms before the diagnosis and this explained all of them. I was super irritable everyday, bouts of constipation or diarrhea, headaches, occasional nausea, lightheadedness, brain fog (really bad that it has been affecting my job), extreme fatigue, excessive gas (it's ridiculous how excessive it is sorry for the TMI), feeling like I can't get a satisfying meal into my stomach, and stomach pain.  

Since then I have been trying the gluten free diet and I started feeling better within a couple days (not 100 percent) but I showed improvement. Well unfortunately I have been "glutened" twice since I started gluten-free 3 weeks ago. I start getting a lot of those same symptoms I listed above again. The last time was a couple days ago... And as of now, I am suffering yet again. 

 

Anyway what I am trying to get at is, I keep reading everywhere that I cannot have an official diagnosis if an endoscopy (biopsy) test doesn't come back positive. I don't have even a consult appointment with the GI doctor for several weeks and who knows when I can get in for an endoscopy. I am afraid that if I stay gluten free, my test will not come out positive and then I will be in the gray area and not know for sure if this is what is wrong. ( I feel like it is, but everyone around me is also making me feel like I am crazy or something) 

 

Apparently you have to be on gluten for your tests to come back with anything?? But I also know that when I eat gluten I feel like death... I don't want to put myself through all that pain I had before. It's like torture.. But I want a confirmed diagnosis. I am so lost and feel so alone in this. 

 

Here are the blood test results that I got back that were positive: 

 

Gliadin Ab IgA        166 (H) <i>    Ref range: 0 -19 

Tissue Transglutaminase Ab IgA         190 (H) <i>     Ref range: 0 -3

 

Also my "IgA" test was 256      Ref range: 91 - 414 

not sure if that makes a difference 

 

And at the bottom of the sheet I got it also says this: 

Endomysial Ab          result: positive 

 

Does this point to a positive celiac diagnosis with just this information?? 

I know certain celiac blood tests are supposedly not as accurate as others.. 

 

I just had to get this off my chest and talk to people about it who actually know what I am going through.. because no one else understands :(  Besides my husband who is being very supportive, but even he doesn't know how I feel. 

I am really afraid that I am going to get a negative biopsy result from the endoscopy and then be left wondering if I have Celiac or not. And then no one will believe me and continue to think I am insane and making it up or something. 


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



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



BlessedMommy Rising Star

The biopsy is less accurate than the blood tests.

 

Personally, if I were you I would go ahead and schedule a biopsy if it worked out, but consider that you have celiac and eat gluten free regardless of the biopsy's results. The intestine is very long and the biopsy can easily miss the damage, unfortunately. Many people have had positive bloodwork and a negative biopsy and have been sent on their gluten eating way until they got progressively sicker and sicker.

 

Your numbers on the bloodwork are sky high. That is pretty indicative. Combined with your symptoms and improvement on the diet, it seems pretty clear.

 

Bottom line: If it makes you sick, don't eat it. Nobody will ask you for a copy of a biopsy report (except your doctor) and anybody who is your real friend will support avoiding that which is toxic to your body. If you can get it confirmed via biopsy, great! But if not, don't feel like a hypochondriac, because your numbers are high, the symptoms are there & they are improving on the diet.

 

Hope that helps!

nvsmom Community Regular

Welcome to the board. :)

 

With three positive celiac disease tests, you really do not need a biopsy.  Some doctors get stuck on that because they think you might be the 5% of people with a weakly positive tTG IgA (tissue transglutaminase) whose test result is caused by something else.  Your result is... about 65 times above the normal range - it doesn't get much higher than that! I have no doubt that your positive tTG is caused by celiac disease.  A result that high shows that your body is attacking your intestinal lining.

 

The AGA IgA (antigliadin antibodies) is a test for gluten sensitivity.  It's quite high.  Gluten sensitivity with an attacked intestine means celiac disease.  :(

 

The Endomysial Ab (EMA IgA) is about 99+% specific to celiac disease. There is less than a 1% chance that a positive EMA IgA is caused by something other than celiac disease.  When the EMA is positive it basically means that it is trying to wipe out the top layer of your intestines because of the damage initially caused by the tTG IgA.  

 

If you had the biopsy done, it would probably show damage. That being said, the biopsy can miss up to 1 in 5 celiacs, confusing the diagnosis process for some.  If you feel comfortable going gluten-free with those (very definitive) tests, then you do not need the biopsy.  Some like to have it for that extra push to go gluten-free, and others like to have it in case they need to refer back to it later, but it won't help you get better in anymore. Go gluten-free if you are happy with your tests.... Well, not happy!  LOL Satisfied maybe?

 

If the biopsy is soon, you could still do it while gluten-free.  With tests like yours, I wouldn't be surprised if there is still damage to see a few weeks or even months down the gluten-free road - but that's just a guess.

 

BTW, I had a positive tTG IgA and EMA and skipped my biopsy. Those tests were enough for me, so I'm probably a bit biased against doing the biopsy. I think they are more useful when tests are negative but celiac disease is still suspected, and not when one already knows the patient has celiac disease.... My rant. Sorry.

 

Welcome again to the boards.  I hope you continue to feel better quickly!  :)

beth01 Enthusiast

What Ruth and Nicole said ^^^.  If you have a doctor that insists on getting an endo and biopsy with results like yours, get a different doctor.  We know you have celiac, you now know you have celiac, another couple thousand dollar test isn't going to change any of it.

 

Read the newbie thread under the "coping" section and learn about cross contamination.  Good luck and welcome to celiac.

SMRI Collaborator

Just another suggestion, if you want the biopsy just to cover all the bases, have your doctor call in the test and set the appointment with the GI.  They can usually get you in much faster.

Georgia-guy Enthusiast

Bakergirl, welcome the the forum!

Your tests can't even see the normal range. It's like your test results are the top of Mount Everest and normal the the base of the mountain. Your doctor ran 3 celaic tests and all 3 came back positive. If your doctor insists on a biopsy, which is pointed out has a 20% chance of a false negative, he probably wants the money from it.

Your blood tests, combined with an improvement on a mostly gluten free diet screams celiac. (As far as the gluten free diet, it gets easier! But like Beth said, check out the "newbie" thread under "coping" for great tips! And then swing by the "what's for dinner?" Thread and share some recipes!)

As far as fully interpreting your test results, the only one nobody explained is the one you seem confused about it's purpose...the "IgA" test that was 256. That test is a control test to determine your overall IgA level. A low range on that test would be a hint of possible celaic, and tell your doctor that any celiac specific IgA tests would be invalid. Since your numbers there were "normal" (and if my math at midnight is correct, they are smack dab in the middle of the normal range), it tells is that your IgA based tests are accurate and can be used for diagnostic purposes.

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. - Mmoc replied to Mmoc's topic in Celiac Disease Pre-Diagnosis, Testing & Symptoms
      2

      Blood tests low iGA 4 years later digestive issues

    2. - Aretaeus Cappadocia replied to Clear2me's topic in Gluten-Free Foods, Products, Shopping & Medications
      6

      Gluten free nuts

    3. - trents replied to Larzipan's topic in Related Issues & Disorders
      42

      Has anyone had terrible TMJ/ Jaw Pain from undiagnosed Celiac?

    4. - Scott Adams replied to Larzipan's topic in Related Issues & Disorders
      42

      Has anyone had terrible TMJ/ Jaw Pain from undiagnosed Celiac?

    5. - Wheatwacked commented on Scott Adams's article in Latest Research
      6

      Study Estimates the Costs of Delayed Celiac Disease Diagnosis (+Video)


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      132,387
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    LizzieE
    Newest Member
    LizzieE
    Joined

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.5k
    • Total Posts
      1m

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):





  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):



  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • Mmoc
      Thank you kindly for your response. I have since gotten the other type of bloods done and am awaiting results. 
    • Aretaeus Cappadocia
      I wanted to respond to your post as much for other people who read this later on (I'm not trying to contradict your experience or decisions) > Kirkland Signature Super Extra-Large Peanuts, 2.5 lbs, are labeled "gluten free" in the Calif Costcos I've been in. If they are selling non-gluten-free in your store, I suggest talking to customer service to see if they can get you the gluten-free version (they are tasty) > This past week I bought "Sliced Raw Almonds, Baking Nuts, 5 lbs Item 1495072 Best if used by Jun-10-26 W-261-6-L1A 12:47" at Costco. The package has the standard warning that it was made on machinery that <may> have processed wheat. Based on that alone, I would not eat these. However, I contacted customer service and asked them "are Costco's Sliced Almonds gluten free?" Within a day I got this response:  "This is [xyz] with the Costco Member Service Resolutions Team. I am happy to let you know we got a reply back from our Kirkland Signature team. Here is their response:  This item does not have a risk of cross contamination with gluten, barley or rye." Based on this, I will eat them. Based on experience, I believe they will be fine. Sometimes, for other products, the answer has been "they really do have cross-contamination risk" (eg, Kirkland Signature Dry Roasted Macadamia Nuts, Salted, 1.5 lbs Item 1195303). When they give me that answer I return them for cash. You might reasonably ask, "Why would Costco use that label if they actually are safe?" I can't speak for Costco but I've worked in Corporate America and I've seen this kind of thing first hand and up close. (1) This kind of regulatory label represents risk/cost to the company. What if they are mistaken? In one direction, the cost is loss of maybe 1% of sales (if celiacs don't buy when they would have). In the other direction, the risk is reputational damage and open-ended litigation (bad reviews and celiacs suing them). Expect them to play it safe. (2) There is a team tasked with getting each product out to market quickly and cheaply, and there is also a committee tasked with reviewing the packaging before it is released. If the team chooses the simplest, safest, pre-approved label, this becomes a quick check box. On the other hand, if they choose something else, it has to be carefully scrutinized through a long process. It's more efficient for the team to say there <could> be risk. (3) There is probably some plug and play in production. Some lots of the very same product could be made in a safe facility while others are made in an unsafe facility. Uniform packaging (saying there is risk) for all packages regardless of gluten risk is easier, cheaper, and safer (for Costco). Everything I wrote here is about my Costco experience, but the principles will be true at other vendors, particularly if they have extensive quality control infrastructure. The first hurdle of gluten-free diet is to remove/replace all the labeled gluten ingredients. The second, more difficult hurdle is to remove/replace all the hidden gluten. Each of us have to assess gray zones and make judgement calls knowing there is a penalty for being wrong. One penalty would be getting glutened but the other penalty could be eating an unnecessarily boring or malnourishing diet.
    • trents
      Thanks for the thoughtful reply and links, Wheatwacked. Definitely some food for thought. However, I would point out that your linked articles refer to gliadin in human breast milk, not cow's milk. And although it might seem reasonable to conclude it would work the same way in cows, that is not necessarily the case. Studies seem to indicate otherwise. Studies also indicate the amount of gliadin in human breast milk is miniscule and unlikely to cause reactions:  https://www.glutenfreewatchdog.org/news/gluten-peptides-in-human-breast-milk-implications-for-cows-milk/ I would also point out that Dr. Peter Osborne's doctorate is in chiropractic medicine, though he also has studied and, I believe, holds some sort of certifications in nutritional science. To put it plainly, he is considered by many qualified medical and nutritional professionals to be on the fringe of quackery. But he has a dedicated and rabid following, nonetheless.
    • Scott Adams
      I'd be very cautious about accepting these claims without robust evidence. The hypothesis requires a chain of biologically unlikely events: Gluten/gliadin survives the cow's rumen and entire digestive system intact. It is then absorbed whole into the cow's bloodstream. It bypasses the cow's immune system and liver. It is then secreted, still intact and immunogenic, into the milk. The cow's digestive system is designed to break down proteins, not transfer them whole into milk. This is not a recognized pathway in veterinary science. The provided backup shifts from cow's milk to human breastmilk, which is a classic bait-and-switch. While the transfer of food proteins in human breastmilk is a valid area of study, it doesn't validate the initial claim about commercial dairy. The use of a Dr. Osborne video is a major red flag. His entire platform is based on the idea that all grains are toxic, a view that far exceeds the established science on Celiac Disease and non-celiac gluten sensitivity. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and a YouTube video from a known ideological source is not that evidence."  
    • Wheatwacked
      Some backup to my statement about gluten and milk. Some background.  When my son was born in 1976 he was colicky from the beginning.  When he transitioned to formula it got really bad.  That's when we found the only pediactric gastroenterologist (in a population of 6 million that dealt with Celiac Disease (and he only had 14 patients with celiac disease), who dianosed by biopsy and started him on Nutramegen.  Recovery was quick. The portion of gluten that passes through to breastmilk is called gliadin. It is the component of gluten that causes celiac disease or gluten intolerance. What are the Effects of Gluten in Breastmilk? Gliaden, a component of gluten which is typically responsible for the intestinal reaction of gluten, DOES pass through breast milk.  This is because gliaden (as one of many food proteins) passes through the lining of your small intestine into your blood. Can gluten transmit through breast milk?  
×
×
  • 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.