Jump to content
This site uses cookies. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. More Info... ×
  • 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

Positive EMA, weak positive TTG, negative biopsy?


Hartelively

Recommended Posts

Hartelively Newbie

Hi all,

I got my endoscopy/biopsy results this morning and they were negative, but in April I tested positive for the EMA and weak positive for TTG. I’m not total IgA deficient but was on the low end of the normal range for that. I went mostly gluten free (still had contaminated food and ate from restaurants though) as per my GI’s recommendation for five months and then did the blood work again: EMA and TTG were totally negative then. I then did a six week gluten challenge eating tons of gluten every day and got my biopsy last week.

My GI took three biopsies which were all negative.

I talked to him on the phone today to ask for clarification and he said he thinks the one positive EMA test was a lab error since I showed absolutely zero signs of celiac in the biopsies and all the contamination I got in my “gluten free” period would have created TTG elevation in my second blood test. He thinks I should be gluten-free but do NOT have celiac.

I later messaged the office asking to have the EMA test again ASAP while I’ve still been eating gluten. I’m so confused because I thought having a positive EMA at all was basically a 100% guarantee of celiac. Is it possible for the lab to just incorrectly report it? Should I get a new doctor if he refuses the new EMA test request?

Thank you 

  • 4 weeks later...

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



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



Scott Adams Grand Master

To me it sounds like you are in the non-celiac gluten sensitive category, which may make up to ~10% of the population. The good news is that you don't have gut damage, but the bad news is that it means that you should still be 100% gluten-free, as some believe that it can develop into full blown celiac disease at some point. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      126,511
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    GiasMimi
    Newest Member
    GiasMimi
    Joined

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      120.9k
    • Total Posts
      69.5k

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):





  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):



  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • jjiillee
      The ulcers are prepyloric ulcers. Not sure if that makes any difference. 
    • trents
      Duodenal ulcers are not uncommon either and often result from H.Pylori infections. https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/duodenal-ulcer
    • trents
    • Scott Adams
      I had what was termed "lesions," and normally ulcers are in the stomach, rather than the small intestines. I'm not sure why they would want you to have her continue to eat gluten, since she had a positive blood test, but as her doctor said, if she is uncomfortable and having symptoms why not have her go gluten-free at this point? If her symptoms improve, it would be another indicator that she has celiac disease and/or gluten sensitivity. This article has some detailed information on how to be 100% gluten-free, so it may be helpful (be sure to also read the comments section.):    
    • Scott Adams
      In the USA we also do a fruit cake that probably has UK origins, and my grandmother's always had lots of rum in it. I just found these:        
×
×
  • Create New...