ArticleJournal of medicine and life
Diagnostic yield of endoscopic markers for celiac disease.
Article in Journal of medicine and life. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current Evidence on Computer-Aided Diagnosis of Celiac Disease: Systematic Review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Pooled it
- Acute Quadriparesis From Concurrent Celiac Crisis and Giardiasis.ACG case reports journal · 2026Article
- Non-Diarrheal Celiac Disease in Iraq: A Multicenter study.Middle East journal of digestive diseases · 2025Article
- Computer-Based Diagnosis of Celiac Disease by Quantitative Processing of Duodenal Endoscopy Images.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Celiac Disease Revisited.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2022Review
- Primary Humoral Immune Deficiencies: Overlooked Mimickers of Chronic Immune-Mediated Gastrointestinal Diseases in Adults.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Red Spot Lesions in the Duodenal Bulb Are a Highly Specific Endoscopic Sign of Celiac Disease: A Prospective Study.Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition · 2019Article
- Comparison of Endoscopic and Histological Findings between Typical and Atypical Celiac Disease in Children.Pediatric gastroenterology, hepatology & nutrition · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleIn the setting of open access endoscopy, the recognition of suggestive endoscopic features in the duodenum can select patients with probability of celiac disease (CD). This could add to the current efforts to increase the diagnostic rate of this disease.
aimThe aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of these markers for CD in an adult population undergoing endoscopy, without a prior serological testing. METHODS AND
resultsOver a period of 3 years, between June 2012 and 2015, all the patients who underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and presented one or more of the endoscopic markers consistent with CD, or those suspected for CD, irrespective of the presence of these markers, were included. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated for these markers in CD diagnosis. Among the 182 patients, 56.04% were females, with a mean age of 47.6 ± 13.9 years. 20/182 (10.99%) had a final diagnosis of CD. The presence of any endoscopic marker had a high sensitivity (95%) and a negative predictive value (98.41%). Bulb atrophy and reduced folds in the descending duodenum had a low diagnostic accuracy, while scalloping, mosaic pattern and fissures were highly specific for CD (98.77%, 99.38% and 98.77%) and their presence greatly increased the probability of CD, with a positive likelihood ratio of 24.3, 24.3 and 12.15, respectively. DISCUSSIONS: A wide set of endoscopic markers, including the duodenal bulb, were evaluated in this study. Our results showed that the endoscopy with a careful examination of the duodenum is a sensitive indicator for CD. ABBREVIATIONS: CD = celiac disease, GI = gastrointestinal, VA = villous atrophy, NSAID = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, Sn = sensitivity, Sp = specificity, PPV = positive predictive value, NPV = negative predictive value, AUC = area under the curve, ROC = receiver operating characteristics, WLE = white light endoscopy, NBI = narrow band imaging, tTG = tissue transglutaminase, EMA = anti-endomysial antibodies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26664469PMC4656951W2212723744What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.