Screening for Celiac Disease in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis. (January 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Irvine, Andrew J; Chey, William D; Ford, Alexander C
• Is Part Of: American journal of gastroenterology. Volume 112(2017)Supplement 1
• Publication Date: 2017-01
• Subjects: Stomach -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Intestines -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Gastroenterology -- Periodicals; Gastrointestinal Diseases -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 616.33
• DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2016.466
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0002-9270

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: Celiac disease (CD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) share similar symptoms, leading to confusion between the two and diagnostic delay. International guidelines recommend screening individuals with IBS for CD, via serological testing. However, studies published recently have cast doubt on the utility of this. We updated a previous meta‐analysis examining this issue. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and EMBASE Classic were searched through to May 2016. Eligible studies recruited adults with IBS according to symptom‐based criteria, physician's opinion, or questionnaire data. Tests for CD included IgA‐class antigliadin antibodies (AGA), endomysial antibodies (EMA), tissue transglutaminase antibodies (tTG), or duodenal biopsies following positive serology. The proportion of individuals meeting criteria for IBS testing positive for CD was combined to give a pooled prevalence for all studies, and compared between cases with IBS and, healthy controls without (where reported), using an odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: There were 36 eligible studies, recruiting 15, 256 individuals, of whom 9, 275 (60.8%) met criteria for IBS. Pooled ORs for positive IgA AGAs, EMA and/or tTG, and biopsy‐proven CD in IBS subjects vs. controls were 3.21 (95% CI 1.55–6.65), 2.75 (95% CI 1.35–5.61), and 4.48 (95% CI 2.33–8.60), respectively. There was no increase in ORs for any test for CD among cases with IBS in North American studies, and results were inconsistent in population‐based studies. The prevalence of biopsy‐proven CD was significantly higher across all subtypes of IBS. Limitations included heterogeneity in some analyses, and few North American studies. Conclusions: Overall, prevalence of positive celiac serology and biopsy‐proven CD was significantly higher in subjects with symptoms suggestive of IBS vs. healthy controls. However, the utility of screening for CD in individuals with suspected IBS in North America or in the community is less clear.