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

Ttg Levels Still Positive


ufgrad98

Recommended Posts

ufgrad98 Newbie

My two daughters were diagnosed with Celiac Disease when they were 7 years old and 4 years old.  They were diagnosed 15 months ago.  We have taken every measure I can think of to make sure the girls are not getting any gluten in their diet.  The whole house is gluten free and I bought all new pots, pans, toasters, etc.  We don't go out to eat much but when we do, I make sure it is a super safe restaurant.  I am confident that the girls are not getting gluten in their diet.  I even make sure to buy gluten free shampoo, conditioner, sunscreen, etc.   My girls are also not eating other people's food or sneaking gluten.  I am absolutely positive they are not getting gluten in their diet!

 

My little girl's labs went right down and have been in the normal range ever since.  The older girl started at a ttg level of 128.  Her labs have been consistently weakly positive since then.  I can not get them into the positive range.  They are usually one point above the normal limit.  Why would her labs not be in the normal range yet?  The girls eat almost the same food at each meal so if one girl is in the normal range, why wouldn't the other girl be too?  So confused!  Any suggestions?


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



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



cyclinglady Grand Master

Have your doctor order the DGP IGA and DGP IGG tests. These seem to be better in determining dietary compliance. The elevated TTG? I recall a few posters saying that other autoimmune disorders could affect it. Hopefully another forum member can shed some light. But I would be happy to find that is the TTG result is almost normal. Some of us take a long time to get that TTG down depending on damage.

oni Newbie

It took my 2 years for my ttg levels ti get to the normal range. Before my titer was normal, my doc said there was a possibility that I had another autoimmune disease or it was possible that I had refractory celiac. But I stuck to the diet and gave my body time to heal, eventually it did. I had blood tests every 6mo until it went into the normal range. I've heard stories from people that take 6mo for their ttg titers to come back negative, and stories from others that took several years. Seems like everyone is different.

If you are worried, chat with your doctor. Maybe there are some simple tests that can rule out other potential issues. It could also just take time.

I hope your daughters are feeling well soon. :)

StephanieL Enthusiast

We've been on the diet for 5 years.  We still have positive tTG's and were dx with thyroid issues too.  No one has any answers as to why or any recommendations.  

 

It just may take more time for your kids. Hope they do come down to normal for you!

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. - Rogol72 replied to HAUS's topic in Gluten-Free Foods, Products, Shopping & Medications
      8

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

    2. - Scott Adams replied to HAUS's topic in Gluten-Free Foods, Products, Shopping & Medications
      8

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

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

      Inconclusive results

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

      Inconclusive results


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      132,442
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    Nony
    Newest Member
    Nony
    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

    • Rogol72
      @HAUS, I was at an event in the UK a few years back. I remember ringing the restaurant ahead to inquire about the gluten free options. All I wanted was a few gluten free sandwiches, which they provided and they were delicious. The gluten-free bread they used was Warbutons white bread and I remember mentioning it on this site before. No harm in trying it once. It's fortified with Calcium and Iron. https://www.warburtonsglutenfree.com/warbs_products/white-loaf/ The only other gluten-free bread that I've come across that is fortified is Schar with Iodized salt, nothing else.
    • 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?
×
×
  • 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.