Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2004 Nov;36(11):993-6.
doi: 10.1055/s-2004-825954.

Duodenal versus jejunal biopsies in suspected celiac disease

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Duodenal versus jejunal biopsies in suspected celiac disease

W J Thijs et al. Endoscopy. 2004 Nov.

Abstract

Background and study aims: In the past, small-bowel biopsies for diagnosis of celiac disease were taken from the jejunum with a suction capsule, but nowadays most physicians take endoscopic biopsies from the distal duodenum. To validate that practice we compared the diagnostic yield of endoscopic duodenal biopsies with that of endoscopic jejunal biopsies. In addition, we describe a method of orienting biopsy specimens optimally.

Patients and methods: Upper endoscopy was performed with a colonoscope. Four jejunal and four duodenal biopsies were taken and oriented immediately thereafter. The pathologist rated the orientation as poor, adequate, or good, and histopathological results were expressed according to the Marsh classification. Jejunal and duodenal biopsy results were compared.

Results: 146 patients were included. Jejunal biopsies were taken in 142 patients, and Marsh I-II lesions were found in 56 and Marsh III lesions in 15 patients. In three patients duodenal biopsies were normal while jejunal biopsies showed Marsh I-II lesions. No discrepancies were found in patients with Marsh III lesions. Orientation was good in all biopsies.

Conclusion: Duodenal biopsies are sufficient to diagnose full-blown celiac disease (Marsh III), but Marsh I-II lesions may be missed in some cases.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types