Impact of delay in the diagnosis on the severity of celiac disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Celiac disease (CeD) has now become a global disease with a worldwide prevalence of 0.67%. Despite being a common disease, CeD is often not diagnosed and there is a significant delay in its diagnosis. We reviewed the impact of the delay in the diagnosis on the severity of manifestations of CeD. METHODS: We reviewed clinical records of 726 consecutive patients with CeD from the Celiac Clinic database and the National Celiac Disease Consortium database. We extracted specific data including the demographics, symptoms at presentation, time of onset of symptoms, time to diagnosis from the onset of the symptoms, and relevant clinical data including fold-rise in anti-tissue transglutaminase antibody (IgA anti-tTG Ab) and severity of villous and crypt abnormalities as assessed using modified Marsh classification. RESULTS: The median duration between the onset of symptoms and the diagnosis of CeD was 27 months (interquartile range 12-60 months). A longer delay in the diagnosis of CeD from the onset of symptoms was associated with lower height for age, lower hemoglobin, higher fold rise in IgA Anti tTG titers, and higher severity of villous and crypt abnormalities. About 18% of patients presented with predominantly non-gastrointestinal complaints and had a longer delay in the diagnosis of CeD. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant delay in the diagnosis of CeD since the onset of its symptoms. The severity of celiac disease increases with increasing delay in its diagnosis. There is a need to keep a low threshold for the diagnosis of CeD in appropriate clinical settings.

A study on the morbid histopathological changes in COVID-19 patients with or without comorbidities using minimally invasive tissue sampling.

COVID-19 causes morbid pathological changes in different organs including lungs, kidneys, liver, and so on, especially in those who succumb. Though clinical outcomes in those with comorbidities are known to be different from those without-not much is known about the differences at the histopathological level. To compare the morbid histopathological changes in COVID-19 patients between those who were immunocompromised (Gr 1), had a malignancy (Gr 2), or had cardiometabolic conditions (hypertension, diabetes, or coronary artery disease) (Gr 3), postmortem tissue sampling (minimally invasive tissue sampling [MITS]) was done from the lungs, kidney, heart, and liver using a biopsy gun within 2 hours of death. Routine (hematoxylin and eosin) and special staining (acid fast bacilli, silver methanamine, periodic acid schiff) was done besides immunohistochemistry. A total of 100 patients underwent MITS and data of 92 patients were included (immunocompromised: 27, malignancy: 18, cardiometabolic conditions: 71). In lung histopathology, capillary congestion was more in those with malignancy, while others like diffuse alveolar damage, microthrombi, pneumocyte hyperplasia, and so on, were equally distributed. In liver histopathology, architectural distortion was significantly different in immunocompromised; while steatosis, portal inflammation, Kupffer cell hypertrophy, and confluent necrosis were equally distributed. There was a trend towards higher acute tubular injury in those with cardiometabolic conditions as compared to the other groups. No significant histopathological difference in the heart was discerned. Certain histopathological features were markedly different in different groups (Gr 1, 2, and 3) of COVID-19 patients with fatal outcomes.