What’s a normal T-igA /iGa

[Courtney541]

I’m very new to this and these are the two blood tests my doctor took but as I research it looks like different labs have different references 

 

mine are:

31017-7 Tissue transglutaminase
Ab.IgA 

result H:4 

reference 0-3 normal, 4-10 mild, plus 10 positive

AND

2458-8 IgA   
result: 321 

reference: 86-351

 

im just confused because I’ve seen so many different reference ranges 

 

[RMJ]

You’re correct, labs have different reference ranges for the tissue transglutaminase IgA because they measure in different units. It would be as if one lab measured in centimeters and one in inches, but for this test the units are amounts per volume, set by each test manufacturer, so there isn’t a conversion factor between them.

The total IgA test does have standardized units. Most labs use mg/dL and have similar ranges.

[Courtney541]

6 minutes ago, RMJ said:

You’re correct, labs have different reference ranges for the tissue transglutaminase IgA because they measure in different units. It would be as if one lab measured in centimeters and one in inches, but for this test the units are amounts per volume, set by each test manufacturer, so there isn’t a conversion factor between them.

The total IgA test does have standardized units. Most labs use mg/dL and have similar ranges.

Thank you for your reply. I just happened to notice that depending on the lab my factor of 4 was sometimes considered “weak positive” other times negative. So I was unsure what to make of this. 
 

thank you

[Scott Adams]

Since there is no such thing as "mild" celiac disease, your test results simply look positive for celiac disease to me. I have no idea why labs are putting "mild" or "weak positive" in their results, as this is totally unhelpful, and may lead many people to continue eating gluten when they should be going gluten-free. An article on this is long overdue for this site.

[Courtney541]

9 hours ago, Scott Adams said:

Since there is no such thing as "mild" celiac disease, your test results simply look positive for celiac disease to me. I have no idea why labs are putting "mild" or "weak positive" in their results, as this is totally unhelpful, and may lead many people to continue eating gluten when they should be going gluten-free. An article on this is long overdue for this site.

Thank you! It really is so confusing- I know I’m posting a lot here but basically my dr just called and said “we think your probably celiac so try not eating gluten” I didn’t even know what celiac meant so have been in the depths of google lol

[Scott Adams]

This sounds a lot like what my doctor said ~27 years ago...it's amazing that many doctors haven't moved beyond this vary narrow advice. A proper consultation warning you of the risks involved if you continue eating gluten would be the proper way for them to handle this. Back when I was diagnosed there was less overall knowledge about the risks, but now there is no excuse for such shortcomings!

[Courtney541]

29 minutes ago, Scott Adams said:

This sounds a lot like what my doctor said ~27 years ago...it's amazing that many doctors haven't moved beyond this vary narrow advice. A proper consultation warning you of the risks involved if you continue eating gluten would be the proper way for them to handle this. Back when I was diagnosed there was less overall knowledge about the risks, but now there is no excuse for such shortcomings!

I agree. They way they handle it makes a person think it’s no big deal. So it was quite shocking when I began researching and realized it is a big deal. I felt like when my mother was diagnosed with type II diabetes they had several appointments, nutrition talks and discussed the risks that sugar caused her body, celiac seems that it’s very similar in that the right diet enables a normal life but being non adherent sets you up for issues!