BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Recent changes in European diagnostic criteria allow for serologic diagnosis of celiac disease in children. Those guidelines have not been adopted in North America; hence, we aim to assess the positive predictive value (PPV) of tissue transglutaminase (tTG) immunoglobulin A (IgA) assays used in North America in identifying histologic findings of celiac disease. METHODS Multicenter retrospective cohort study of children (<18 years) with an elevated tTG IgA within 6 months of an esophagogastroduodenoscopy between January 2016 and December 2021. Biopsy-confirmed celiac disease was determined by the presence of intraepithelial lymphocytosis and villous atrophy. The primary outcomes were the PPV of an elevated tTG IgA and tTG IgA greater than or equal to 10 times the upper limit of normal (10× ULN). RESULTS Overall, 4019 children (63.3% female; 9% type 1 diabetes, 2% Down syndrome) were included. Histologic findings were consistent with celiac disease for 3321 children (PPV = 82.6% [95% CI, 81.4–83.8]). Among the 1739/4019 (43.2%) children with tTG IgA greater than or equal to 10× ULN, 1651 had biopsy-confirmed celiac disease (PPV10× = 94.9% [95% CI, 93.8–95.9]). Five percent (88/1739) of children did not have histologic findings of celiac disease, including 41/1739 (2%) with normal histology. Diagnostic accuracy of tTG IgA varied widely among assays used in North America (PPV range: 71.5%–88.8%; PPV10× range: 89.3%–97.3%). Assays performed worse in children with type 1 diabetes (PPV10× 89% [95% CI, 83.5–92.8]). CONCLUSIONS Elevated tTG IgA in isolation is insufficient to confidently diagnose celiac disease. As tTG assay performance varied widely, diagnostic confirmation by a specialist prior to dietary changes is essential.
Assessing Mucosal Recovery During the First 15 Months of Adopting a Gluten-Free Diet in Children With Celiac Disease
INTRODUCTION: Determine contemporary rates of early mucosal recovery in children with celiac disease (CeD). METHODS: Multicenter retrospective cohort study in Canada and the United States. Children diagnosed with CeD between 2016 and 2021 who underwent a follow-up biopsy within 15 months of diagnosis were included. RESULTS: Overall, 96 of 130 children (74%) had mucosal recovery, including 48% children (12/25) who were assessed within 3 months. Musculoskeletal symptoms at diagnosis were the only clinical characteristic associated with persistent enteropathy. DISCUSSION: While mucosal recovery can occur within months, more than a quarter of children with CeD had persistent enteropathy within 15 months of treatment.
A39 IMPACT OF AN ENDOSCOPIC OPTICAL DIAGNOSIS COURSE ON GASTROINTESTINAL NEOPLASM CHARACTERIZATION SKILLS AMONG TRAINEE ENDOSCOPISTS
Abstract Background Real-time endoscopic optical diagnosis involves detailed visualization of the digestive mucosal and microvascular pattern, allowing for prediction of histology. This is advantageous as it can guide endoscopic resection decisions, surgical referrals and provide cost savings to histopathology. There is, however, no standardized or widely implemented curriculum for endoscopists or trainees to learn optical diagnosis skills. Aims To evaluate the impact of a course for the optical diagnosis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), early gastric cancer (EGC), Barrett’s esophagus (BE), and colorectal polyps Methods 19 gastroenterology trainees were invited to the 2-day course in Kingston, Canada. Number of procedures previously performed was recorded. The impact of the course on lesion diagnosis accuracy was evaluated using a pre-test, immediate post-test, and delayed post-test administered 6 weeks after the course. A repeated measures ANOVA was performed to compare the mean score (%) between the three tests. Results 13 trainees completed all the tests (Table 1). Mean score % values for the overall tests and test scores for esophageal, gastric, and colon lesions were summarized on Table 1. The repeated measures ANOVA determined that the mean score % had a statistically significant difference between the three tests (F (2,24)=5.63, P=0.01). Pairwise comparisons revealed that there was a statistically significant increase in mean scores between pre- and post-tests (13.86 (95% confidence interval (CI) of 4.36 to 23.33), p<0.01) with no significant difference between post and delayed post-tests (8.46 (95% CI of -0.12 to 17.04), p>0.05) (Figure 1). The mean correct % from the delayed post-test was higher than the pre-test but there was no statistical significance (5.39 (95% CI of -3.72 to 14.49), p>0.05). Conclusions This novel optical diagnosis course improved trainee accuracy in diagnosing ESCC, EGC, BE and colorectal polyps. Learning retention was evident, with no significant score difference between immediate and delayed post-tests. This study was limited by the low sample size and low number of test items. Further investigation is required to validate the course for international trainees and explore its clinical transferability. Demography and Mean Score % Figure 1. Mean score %. (*) denotes p<0.05. Funding Agencies None
Defining standards for fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy using Delphi methodology
Abstract Background and study aims Use of fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy is an essential aid in advanced endoscopic interventions. However, it also raises concerns about radiation exposure. This study aimed to develop consensus-based statements for safe and effective use of fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy, prioritizing the safety and well-being of healthcare workers and patients. Methods A modified Delphi approach was employed to achieve consensus over three rounds of surveys. Proposed statements were generated in Round 1. In the second round, panelists rated potential statements on a 5-point scale, with consensus defined as ≥80% agreement. Statements were subsequently prioritized in Round 3, using a 1 (lowest priority) to 10 (highest priority) scale. Results Forty-six experts participated, consisting of 34 therapeutic endoscopists and 12 endoscopy nurses from six continents, with an overall 45.6% female representation (n = 21). Forty-three item statements were generated in the first round. Of these, 31 statements achieved consensus after the second round. These statements were categorized into General Considerations (n = 6), Education (n = 10), Pregnancy (n = 4), Family Planning (n = 2), Patient Safety (n = 4), and Staff Safety (n = 5). In the third round, accepted statements received mean priority scores ranging from 7.28 to 9.36, with 87.2% of statements rated as very high priority (mean score ≥ 9). Conclusions This study presents consensus-based statements for safe and effective use of fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy, addressing the well-being of healthcare workers and patients. These consensus-based statements aim to mitigate risks associated with radiation exposure while maintaining benefits of fluoroscopy, ultimately promoting a culture of safety in healthcare settings.
Celiac disease in North America: What is the current practice of pediatric gastroenterology providers?
Abstract Objectives While guidelines exist for the diagnosis and management of pediatric celiac disease (CeD), current practices in North America are not well‐described. This study aimed to explore current practice patterns to identify gaps and direct future clinical, training and research initiatives. Methods A 23‐item survey designed by the Celiac Disease Special Interest Group was distributed electronically to its members. Questions explored four themes: (1) screening and diagnosis pre and post the coronavirus disease (COVID)‐19 pandemic, (2) treatment and monitoring, (3) family screening and transition of care, and (4) CeD focused training. Results The survey response rate was 10.8% (278/2552). Most respondents were from the United States (89.9%, n = 250) and Canada (8.6%, n = 24). While endoscopy remained the gold standard, serology‐based diagnosis was accepted by 47.5% (132/278). In response to the COVID‐19 pandemic, 37.4% of providers changed their diagnostic practice. Barriers to care included: lack of insurance coverage for dietitians, wait times, and lack of CeD focused training. During fellowship 69.1% (192/278) reported no focused CeD training. Conclusion Survey results revealed practice variation regarding the diagnosis and management of CeD in North America including a substantial proportion accepting non‐biopsy, serology‐based diagnosis, which increased during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Variations in screening, diagnosis, interval surveillance, and family screening were also identified. Dedicated CeD education in pediatric gastroenterology fellowship may be an opportunity for standardizing practice and advancing research. Future North American guidelines should take current care patterns into consideration and develop new initiatives to improve care of children with CeD.
Establishing Standards for Gastrointestinal Endoscopic-Related Fluoroscopy: An International Expert Consensus Using a Modified Delphi Process