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

Ema And Ttg Tests

chaddwell

Recommended Posts

chaddwell Apprentice
chaddwell
Posted

Hello,

I had mentioned in my very first post that I was tested for celiac disease in 99 and that panel included the EMA, not the tTG. My EMA at that time was a high positive, 35. Biopsy shortly later was negative. Doctor said it may have been early or patchy disease.

Fast forward 3 years to 2002...I was retested for celiac by the same doctor only this time my tests did NOT include the EMA which was previously positive. This panel had the tTG and it was negative as all my other tests. So this time the doctor concluded that I don't have it, take more fiber.

My question is this...should I believe that the EMA was a true positive or a false positive because the tTG was negative at a later date? I don't know if you can actually answer that or not but any info you have about these two tests would be appreciated.

I read that they both measure the same damage and the EMA was being replaced by the tTG. My fear now is that I won't be able to get the EMA test done, that's the one I want. I go to Quest for blood work and I know if they don't feel an ordered test is necessary based on the other test results they won't do it. I don't like that. I want the EMA ran because of the previous positive. My first EMA wasn't done by Quest though.

I also read that the probability/specificity of the EMA for being a true positive was around the 97% range. I know it was pretty high in the 90s. All these years and especially now since reading those numbers I keep wondering if that test is true. But my doc thought it was false.

Has anyone here with celiac had a positive EMA and a negative tTG? I posted that I am seeing a GI on the 12th. I hope I will be able to get the EMA redone. This is a new doctor since I moved to another state. Should I mention that I was retested and that came out negative or just mention the first positive and the biopsy?

Any info anyone can shed on these two tests would be appreciated. For some reason in my mind being tested for one with a positive result and then retested with another test and getting a negative don't equal one another, like apples and oranges. But like I said, I read that EMA and tTG measure the same thing and the tTG is taking the place of EMA.

OK, I'm rambling. Looking forward to your input.

Thanks.

Channon

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

Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):


Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):


  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      128,391
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748
    Gayle Lafond
    Newest Member
    Gayle Lafond
    Joined
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.1k
    • Total Posts
      70.9k
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):



  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):


  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • trents
      Negative biopsy and seeking doctor recs in Los Angeles

      By trents · Posted

      If you have been eating the gluten equivalent of 4-6 slices of wheat bread daily for say, 4 weeks, I think a repeat blood test would be valid.
    • englishbunny
      Negative biopsy and seeking doctor recs in Los Angeles

      By englishbunny · Posted

      it did include Total Immunoglobin A which was 135, and said to be in normal range. when i did the blood test in January I would say I was on a "light' gluten diet, but def not gluten free.  I didn't have any clue about the celiac thing then.  Since then I have been eating a tonne of gluten for the purpose of the endoscopy....so I'm debating just getting my blood test redone right away to see if it has changed so I'm not waiting another month...
    • trents
      Negative biopsy and seeking doctor recs in Los Angeles

      By trents · Posted

      Welcome to the forum, @englishbunny! Did your celiac panel include a test for "Total IGA"? That is a test for IGA deficiency. If you are IGA deficient, other IGA test resultls will likely be falsely low. Were you by any chance already practicing a reduced gluten free diet when the blood draw was done?
    • englishbunny
      Negative biopsy and seeking doctor recs in Los Angeles

      By englishbunny · Posted

      I'm upset & confused and really need help finding a new gastro who specializes in celiac in California.  Also will welcome any insights on my results. I tested with an isolated positive for deamidated IGA a few months ago (it was 124.3, all other values on celiac panel <1.0), I also have low ferritin and Hashimotos. Mild gastro symptoms which don't seem to get significantly worse with gluten but I can't really tell... my main issues being extreme fatigue and joint pain. The celiac panel was done by my endocrinologist to try and get to the bottom of my fatigue and I was shocked to have a positive result. Just got negative biposy result from endoscopy. Doctor only took two biopsies from small intestine (from an area that appeared red), and both are normal. Problem is his Physician's Assistant can't give me an answer whether I have celiac or not, or what possible reason I might have for having positive antibodies if I don't have it. She wants me to retest bloods in a month and says in the meantime to either "eat gluten or not, it's up to you, but your bloodwork won't be accurate if you don't" I asked if it could be I have early stage celiac so the damage is patchy and missed by only having two samples taken, and she said doctor would've seen damaged areas when performing endoscopy (?) and that it's a good sign if my whole intestine isn't damaged all over, so even if there is spotty damage I am fine.  This doesn't exactly seem satisfactory, and seems to be contrary to so much of the reading and research I have done. I haven't seen the doctor except at my endoscopy, and he was pretty arrogant and didn't take much time to talk. I can't see him or even talk to him for another month. I'm really confused about what I should do. I don't want to just "wait and see" if I have celiac and do real damage in the meantime. Because I know celiac is more that just 'not eating bread' and if I am going to make such a huge lifestyle adjustment I need an actual diagnosis. So in summary I want to find another doctor in CA, preferably Los Angeles but I don't care at this stage if they can do telehealth! I just need some real answers from someone who doesn't talk in riddles. So recommendations would be highly welcomed. I have Blue Shield CA insurance, loads of gastros in LA don’t take insurance at all 😣
    • trents
      Oats gluten free?

      By trents · Posted

      Okay, Lori, we can agree on the term "gluten-like". My concern here is that you and other celiacs who do experience celiac reactions to other grains besides wheat, barley and rye are trying to make this normative for the whole celiac community when it isn't. And using the term "gluten" to refer to these other grain proteins is going to be confusing to new celiacs trying to figure out what grains they actually do need to avoid and which they don't. Your experience is not normative so please don't proselytize as if it were.
×
×
  • Create New...