Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: Celiac disease (CD) is underdiagnosed, and iron-deficiency anemia (IDA) is a common presentation of CD. No guidelines exist in the literature for screening for CD among those with IDA in the United States. We surveyed hematologists to deter- mine rates of CD screening in patients with IDA. METHODS: A survey was e-mailed to members of the American Society of Hematology. RESULTS: There were 385 complete responses from 4551 e-mails. Most respondents were practicing clinicians (74%), clinical researchers (10%), or laboratory researchers (6%). Specialists in benign hematology accounted for 45% of respondents, oncologists accounted for 33%, and specialists in malignant hematology accounted for 22%. The most common practice types were university-affiliated hospital (43%), private clinic (29%), community hospital (12%), and Veterans Affairs or military hospital (9%). Only 8.6% believed all patients with IDA should be screened for CD. Respondents who had completed their fellowship within 5 years were more likely than more experienced clinicians to believe that all patients with IDA should receive CD screening (OR, 2.8; CI; 1.1-7.5; P=.04). Having a higher volume of IDA patients per month also increased the likelihood of testing (P=.01). In multivariate analysis, specialists in malignant hematology (OR, 3.2; CI, 1.1-9.5; P=.04) and oncologists (OR, 3.5; CI, 1.3-9.5; P=.02) were more likely than specialists in benign hematology to screen all patients for CD, as were those who saw predominately pediatric patients with IDA vs adult patients (OR, 16.9; CI, 3.0-97.0; P=.002). CONCLUSIONS: Practicing hematologists infrequently screen for CD in IDA. Physicians who have recently finished their fellowship and those who see a high volume of patients with IDA are more likely to screen for CD.

BACKGROUND: Celiac disease (CD) is under-diagnosed in the United States, and factors related to the performance of endoscopy may be contributory. AIM: To identify newly diagnosed patients with CD who had undergone a prior esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and examine factors contributing to the missed diagnosis. METHODS: We identified all patients age >/= 18 years whose diagnosis of CD was made by endoscopy with biopsy at our institution (n = 316), and searched the medical record for a prior EGD. We compared those patients with a prior EGD to those with without a prior EGD with regard to age at diagnosis and gender, and enumerated the indications for EGD. RESULTS: Of the 316 patients diagnosed by EGD with biopsy at our center, 17 (5 %) had previously undergone EGD. During the prior non-diagnostic EGD, a duodenal biopsy was not performed in 59 % of the patients, and >/= 4 specimens (the recommended number) were submitted in only 29 % of the patients. On the diagnostic EGD, >/= 4 specimens were submitted in 94 %. The mean age of diagnosis of those with missed/incident CD was 53.1 years, slightly older than those diagnosed with CD on their first EGD (46.8 years, p = 0.11). Both groups were predominantly female (missed/incident CD: 65 vs. 66 %, p = 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Among 17 CD patients who had previously undergone a non-diagnostic EGD, non-performance of duodenal biopsy during the prior EGD was the dominant feature. Routine performance of duodenal biopsy during EGD for the indications of dyspepsia and reflux may improve CD diagnosis rates.