Are Blood Test Accurate If You Have Been gluten-free For 1-1/2 Years?

[TeacherMommy2009]

Here's the skinny: for various reasons we took our son off gluten November 2009. He was 3 at the time, he has shown a ton of improvement but has recently started asking to eat "the good food, with gluten in it". LOL He pulls at my heart strings & at our last annual doctors appointment the Dr. asked if I would like a celiac panel taken. I said that I didn't think the results would be accurate since he hasn't eaten gluten for almost 2 years (besides the very occasional accident). She said not to worry and he wouldn't need gluten in his system for an accurate test [Question #1 - is this true?]

Here are the results from his test:

Antigliadin IgG Antibody -- < 3

Reference Range:

Negative: <11

Equivocal: 11-17

Positive: > 17

Tissue Transglutaminase Antibody -- < 3

Reference Range:

Negative: < 5

Equivocal: 5-8

Positive: > 8

Total IGA -- 65

Reference Range: 33-235

Question #2 - what does this mean?

The Dr. said "how about we take a little blood & see if you can eat gluten again"

It took everything in me not to knock her out.

Thank you for any explanation/advice/info you can give me!

[GlutenFreeManna]

Sorry, but your dr is ignorant and wrong. You need to be consuming gluten for the antibody tests. Show her this: Open Original Shared Link

Before giving it to her, take a marker and highlight the part on the second page that says "Antibody tests are only accurate when a patient is on a gluten-containing diet. Those concerned about celiac disease are strongly discouraged from starting a gluten-free diet without having had a firm diagnosis. Any change in the diet, even for as little as a month or two, can complicate the diagnostic process."

[TeacherMommy2009]

I can't say I'm completely surprised. In fact, from what I read on-line I had a feeling that was going to be the case. I feel like I had a moment of weakness when I agreed to have him tested. I will indeed go ahead and show her this. I saw on the 2nd page where it referenced the "gene test" and the fact that gluten in the system wasn't necessary for that. Is that what the "IGA, SERUM" is? (That is how it read on his results.)

[kareng]

A gene test is different than the blood tests. The blood tests test for the prescence of an antibody. Your body makes them when there is gluten in your small intestines. If you are not eating gluten, you shouldn't be making these antibodies. A gene test can tell you if you have a gene that could, some time, cause Celiac. Many people have the gene but don't have Celiac. I know there are still tests going on to determine what genes or combos of genes are needed for Celiac.

IgA is not a gene test.

[TeacherMommy2009]

A gene test is different than the blood tests. The blood tests test for the prescence of an antibody. Your body makes them when there is gluten in your small intestines. If you are not eating gluten, you shouldn't be making these antibodies. A gene test can tell you if you have a gene that could, some time, cause Celiac. Many people have the gene but don't have Celiac. I know there are still tests going on to determine what genes or combos of genes are needed for Celiac.

IgA is not a gene test.

Thank You so much! I guess I really shouldn't have wasted my time. :-\

[89Mirageman]

Don't feel bad, my Doctor is clueless as well. I mentioned celiac or gluten intolerance to him on Monday and told him I had been on the diet for a week or so. He looked at me and said I didn't fit the description of someone with either disease because they all have diaharrea, not constipation. He then told me we could test for it in two months when I come back for labs. I think I'll take the two months to find a new doctor instead.