No More Biopsies to Diagnose Celiac Disease in Children!

Finally!! The data was clear for a long time that blood tests are very specific and sensitive. Subjecting children to a general anesthetic when the diagnosis was determined anyway by the blood tests is not only expensive but poses unnecessary risks. The concept that biopsy is the gold standard is just not true because even with a negative biopsy, if the blood tests are positive, the diagnosis is established. This is not how a gold standard works. 

I was recently diagnosed celiac disease by blood test last week. My biopsy last year showed that I wasn't. So no, biopsy is not a gold standard and can be wrong.

I was diagnosed with celiac almost 13 years ago. My blood test was off the charts, but I had to have an endoscopy to confirm it. I have relatives with type 1 diabetes, M.S., Hashimotos & IBS. Should they all get the blood test for celiac?

My son was diagnosed as celiac at age 2 in 1978.  They did not have blood tests then, did not want to do a biopsy because of his excellent improvement with the gluten-free diet, the increased risk of a general anesthetic in small children (back then, no sevoflurane, no pulse oximeters, etc.).  So, at age 12, the pediatric gastroenterologist, when asked to do a biopsy by the pediatrician, just laughed and said, with this child's history of flourishing on the diet, and having severe reactions with inadvertent gluten exposure, he wouldn't even believe a negative biopsy, just think that by bad luck none of his 6 biopsies hit the right spot, rare but can happen. Asked me, Mom if the biopsy were negative would you take the child off his gluten-free diet?  I said No, unless someone comes to my house and does the subsequent laundry.