Cited by 157Celiac Disease Research and ManagementEosinophilic EsophagitisWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology

Celiac Disease without Villous Atrophy in Children: A Prospective Study

Kurppa, Kalle, Ashorn, Merja, Iltanen, Sari, Koskinen, Lotta L.E., Saavalainen, Päivi, Koskinen, Outi, Mäki, Markku, Kaukinen, Katri·2010·The Journal of Pediatrics

Abstract

Objective To establish whether children who are endomysial antibody (EmA) positive and have normal small-bowel mucosal villous morphology are truly gluten-sensitive and may benefit from early treatment with a gluten-free diet. Study design Children who were EmA positive with normal small-bowel mucosal villi were compared with children who were seropositive with villous atrophy by using several markers of untreated celiac disease. Thereafter, children with normal villous structure either continued on a normal diet or were placed on a gluten-free diet and re-investigated after 1 year. Seventeen children who were seronegative served as control subjects for baseline investigations. Results Normal villous morphology was noted in 17 children who were EmA positive, and villous atrophy was noted in 42 children who were EmA positive. These children were comparable in all measured variables regardless of the degree of enteropathy, but differed significantly from the seronegative control subjects. During the dietary intervention, in children who were EmA positive with normal villi, the disease was exacerbated in children who continued gluten consumption, whereas in all children who started the gluten-free diet, both the gastrointestinal symptoms and abnormal antibodies disappeared. Conclusions The study provided evidence that children who are EmA positive have a celiac-type disorder and benefit from early treatment despite normal mucosal structure, indicating that the diagnostic criteri…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpeds.2010.02.070

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kurppa, K., Ashorn, M., Iltanen, S., Koskinen, L. L. E., Saavalainen, P., Koskinen, O., Mäki, M., & Kaukinen, K.
Affiliations
  • Tampere University Hospital (FI)
  • University of Helsinki (FI)
Corresponding author
Kaukinen, Katri
Venue
The Journal of Pediatrics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-09
Volume
157
Issue
3
Pages
373-380.e1
ISSN
0022-3476 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1970670432
Cited by
157
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 18
FWCI
21.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Pediatrics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Celiac Disease Research and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Eosinophilic Esophagitis
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Wheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Keywords
celiac disease, anti-endomysial antibodies, villous atrophy, gluten-free diet, gluten sensitivity, children, small intestinal mucosa, serological diagnosis, dietary intervention, gastrointestinal symptoms, diagnostic criteria
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Celiac Disease, Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Male, Prospective Studies, Diet, Gluten-Free, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review