Our research was conducted at a referral center and involved 302 children, with an average age of 8.29 ± 4.27 years. We categorized them into two groups: Twenty-five confirmed cases of celiac disease and 277 potential cases. This classification was based on clinical symptoms, serological tests, and Marsh grading. Statistically, the average age was comparable in both groups. Notably, there was a higher proportion of female patients compared to males. The primary aim of our study was to identify RSLs in the duodenal bulb during endoscopy and to determine their role in diagnosing or screening children, particularly those with rare, atypical complaints or even asymptomatic cases.
The high specificity and low sensitivity of RSLs observed in this study indicate that the absence of these lesions is a strong indicator for ruling out celiac disease. However, the sensitivity of RSLs was modest (60%), and their PPV was relatively low (39.4%), indicating that many patients with celiac disease do not exhibit RSLs. This suggests that RSLs alone are not sufficient as a stand-alone screening marker, particularly in populations with a low to moderate prevalence of celiac disease. Our methodology and variables closely resemble those used in Silvester et al.'s study. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and negative predictive value of RSLs for diagnosing celiac disease as 60%, 91.6%, 39.4%, and 96.2%, respectively. In comparison, Silvester’s study reported these values as 31%, 94%, 80%, and 64%, respectively (
1).
Considering that our study was conducted at a referral center, where screening tests with high specificity help to distinguish healthy individuals and those with the disease, the specificity of RSLs, as investigated in our study, is particularly important. As indicated in
Table 3, the specificity of RSLs is 91.6%, underscoring its clinical significance in diagnosing celiac disease.
Given that both the specificity and negative predictive value in our study exceeded 90%, we can infer that patients lacking RSLs on endoscopy are unlikely to have celiac disease. The RSLs should be used in combination with other clinical and serological markers, not in isolation. When RSLs are present, especially in patients with suggestive serology (elevated tTG-IgA) or symptoms, they may raise suspicion and support the diagnostic process. Conversely, if RSLs are absent, the high negative predictive value can help reassure clinicians to consider alternate diagnoses, especially when other findings are equivocal.
In clinical practice, the endoscopic finding of RSLs could serve as an adjunctive marker, especially for ruling out celiac disease when negative. However, given their limited sensitivity, relying solely on RSLs risks missing a substantial proportion of celiac patients. Thus, we recommend that RSLs be evaluated as part of a multi-parametric approach that combines clinical, serological, and other endoscopic features, such as scalloping or a mosaic pattern, to enhance both sensitivity and specificity in screening and diagnosis.
An important finding, especially for rare diseases like celiac disease, is the influence of disease prevalence on predictive values. In Silvester et al.'s study (
1), they reported a high PPV. However, it is crucial to recognize that PPV is contingent on the prevalence of the disease, meaning it can vary across different populations. In our study, the case-to-control ratio is roughly 1:11, reflective of a lower prevalence of celiac disease, resulting in a PPV of 39.4%. In contrast, Silvester's study had a closer case-to-control ratio of about 1:1.5, leading to a higher PPV (
1).
Other important metrics prove especially useful in substantiating results, particularly in rare diseases. Referring to
Table 3, the positive and negative LRs for the endoscopic findings of RSLs, scalloping, and flattening folds demonstrate meaningful and reliable results. Given their proximity in values, these metrics facilitate diagnosis in all three cases of endoscopy. Consequently, they can collectively be considered an effective and significant screening test.
A study conducted by Semwal et al. compared endoscopic findings in children with celiac disease, distinguishing between typical and atypical manifestations. Their most common endoscopic observations included scalloping, mosaic patterns with decreased fold height, and nodularity (
11). They noted that identifying these alterations in duodenal mucosa could lead to an earlier diagnosis of celiac disease, especially in children with atypical presentations. They concluded that scalloping is the main endoscopic indicator of celiac disease in children (
11). Their findings align with a study by Sahyouni et al. (
12), whose retrospective study formed a consecutive cohort. They reported the highest sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 96% for scalloping in the diagnosis of celiac disease in children. Furthermore, they observed a correlation between higher Marsh stages and an increased prevalence of scalloping (
12). The findings from both these studies align with ours, despite variations in study designs and parameters.
The RSLs are distinct from both the visible submucosal vasculature, which serves as an endoscopic marker for celiac disease, and distal duodenal erosions (
13,
14). These lesions appear in areas of intact mucosa and are not linked to superficial erosions. Their enhanced visibility under NBI suggests that they may represent submucosal blood, potentially within dilated vascular structures (
15). Interestingly, RSLs have shown a strong association with elevated serum tTG IgA antibody levels. In celiac disease, the immune response primarily targets the tTG-2 isotype, which plays a role as a diagnostic marker and a key driver of the harmful immune process in celiac disease (
1,
16). Components of the vascular wall, such as vimentin, are recognized as substrates of tTG-2. Experimental models have demonstrated that inhibiting tTG-2 can induce mesenteric vasodilation. Furthermore, tTG-2 is involved in regulating capillary sprouting and angiogenesis (
17,
18). These observations imply that immune-driven vascular alterations mediated by tTG-2 antibodies may contribute to RSL formation in celiac disease. Further research is necessary to clarify the vascular impact of tTG-2 antibodies and uncover the underlying mechanisms.
Our study found that chronic abdominal pain was the most prevalent gastrointestinal symptom among our patient population. This finding aligns with the study by Dehbozorgi et al., which identified abdominal pain, bloating, and constipation as common gastrointestinal symptoms in patients (
4). Dehbozorgi et al. also noted that type 1 diabetes and hypothyroidism were frequently associated with celiac disease (
4). However, when comparing these underlying conditions (type 1 diabetes and hypothyroidism) in our study's two groups, we observed no significant differences (
4). This discrepancy could be attributed to variations in sample sizes and also the duration of follow-up, since conditions like type 1 diabetes and hypothyroidism may emerge later, especially in younger children. Moreover, the co-occurrence of hypothyroidism and type 1 diabetes as primary autoimmune comorbidities with celiac disease is a very complex and multifactorial issue. It necessitates a large population and long-term randomized trials to thoroughly explore this association. Additionally, the impact of a gluten-free diet and its duration on the onset timing of such comorbidities remains unclear (
19).
Our results revealed that the BMI Z-score Index was significantly higher in the potential group compared to the definite group. This result is consistent with prior studies. For instance, van der Pals et al. investigated body indices in children with celiac disease and found that those with a confirmed diagnosis typically had lower weights, shorter statures, and reduced BMI compared to their healthy counterparts. Despite this, their BMI often remained within the normal range for the broader population (
20).
In terms of familial patterns, our study noted a higher incidence of celiac disease history among siblings in the definite celiac group compared to the potential group. This finding is supported by Sahin and Mermer, who identified a higher prevalence of the disease among first-degree relatives, especially siblings, who are at a higher risk (
21). The frequent occurrence of celiac disease within families, along with its strong association with the HLA DQ2 and/or DQ8 alleles, further underscores the significant genetic contribution to its development. Additional studies focusing on siblings corroborate our findings: The global prevalence of celiac disease is estimated to be 3.9% among siblings of children with confirmed celiac disease and significantly higher, between 75 = 80%, among monozygotic twins (
22,
23). In a study by Sahin and Mermer, it was shown that 10.7% of siblings of celiac patients were affected by the disease (
21).
In summary, while the presence of RSLs in the duodenal bulb during endoscopy may assist in supporting a diagnosis of celiac disease, particularly in patients with positive serology and/or symptoms, their absence has a more definitive role in ruling out the disease in a high-risk context. Therefore, we recommend that RSLs be considered an adjunctive, rather than a primary, tool in celiac screening protocols. Integrating RSL findings with serology and clinical risk factors will allow for a more accurate and effective screening process.
5.1. Conclusions
The RSLs, along with scalloping and fold flattening observed during endoscopic examinations, may serve as potential indicators for suspected celiac disease. While these findings warrant attention during endoscopy, particularly in patients with gastrointestinal symptoms and positive serological tests, the role of RSLs in screening remains limited. The high specificity but low sensitivity and PPV of RSLs, as demonstrated in this study, make them unsuitable as a primary screening tool, suggesting that their absence can be a reliable tool for ruling out celiac disease. However, the presence of RSLs does not strongly support a diagnosis, reflecting the limited diagnostic value of these lesions in confirming celiac disease. Overall, these findings emphasize the negative predictive value of RSLs, highlighting their utility in exclusion rather than in definitive diagnosis. Definitive diagnosis must remain based on histopathological evaluation of duodenal biopsies, interpreted according to the Marsh classification by an experienced pathologist, in line with ESPGHAN guidelines. Further studies with diverse designs are recommended to explore their potential role more comprehensively.
5.2. Limitations and Suggestions
Our study faced certain limitations, including a brief duration and a consequently small sample size. Expanding the scope to include more participants and a longer timeframe would likely yield more precise and reliable results. Additionally, our research was conducted exclusively in a pediatric center. Conducting similar studies across multiple centers and broader populations would enhance the generalizability of the findings. A key limitation of our study design was the selection of the comparative group, which consisted of patients with milder forms of celiac disease rather than non-celiac individuals. Ideally, the control group should have included healthy children. However, considering the invasive nature of endoscopy under anesthesia, enrolling healthy children posed significant ethical and practical challenges. As an alternative, patients without duodenal pathology, such as those with functional abdominal pain or gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), could have served as a more appropriate control population. This adjustment would have provided a clearer comparison and improved the study’s diagnostic validity. Given the limited research on the association between RSLs and celiac disease, we suggest broader study models. Larger multicenter studies are warranted to confirm these findings.