A meta-analysis of studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) for antibodies against tissue transglutaminases (tTG) of various origins in celiac disease (CD) diagnosis was carried out. Twenty-one studies, with untreated CD patients and healthy/CD-free controls, were included in the meta-analysis. The diagnostic accuracy was estimated using a summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve and pooled sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp). Multiple assays within a study were treated by considering all the assays within a study and by analyzing the most popular assay (i.e., the commercial anti-tTTG ELISA most frequently utilized in the papers in which multiple assays were included). The SROC curve indicated the absence of heterogeneity, and the superiority of recombinant human tTG (rh-tTG) and purified human tTG (ph-tTG) compared to guinea pig-tTG (gp-tTG). The sensitivities (most popular assay) for rh-tTG, ph-tTG, and gp-tTG were 94%, 90%, and 92%, respectively, and the specificities were 97%, 92%, and 96%, respectively. A sensitivity analysis (exclusion of studies with bias) altered the results of ph-tTG: Se, 95%; Sp, 98%. The sensitivities (all individual assays) for rh-tTG, ph-tTG, and gp-tTG were 94%, 94%, and 91%, respectively, and the specificities were 95%, 94%, and 89%, respectively. Human tTG ELISA is sensitive and specific, and it can be used for mass screening. Sensitivity analysis showed that ph-tTG might perform better.Due to the high prevalence of oligosymptomatic celiac disease (CD), the use of serological diagnostic assays becomes extremely useful in clinical practice, eliminating the performance of needless intestinal biopsies. Among them, assays of immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies against tissue transglutaminase (tTG) present with the most promising diagnostic characteristics (1,8,25,29,34). Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) using recombinant human tTG (rh-tTG), purified human tTG (ph-tTG), and guinea pig tTG (gp-tTG) as substrates had been developed, and a plethora of relevant commercial kits are available (8,25,29,36). Despite, however, the fact that these kits present with sufficient sensitivities and specificities, published studies have showed inconsistent effects. Therefore, an estimate of the overall accuracy of each tTG type test and a comparison between them seem imperative.The primary aim of this meta-analysis was to assist in the interpretation of the anti-tTG in testing for CD and to assess the relative diagnostic accuracy of rh-tTG, ph-tTG, and gp-tTG ELISAs in the diagnosis of CD by evaluating sensitivity and specificity on the basis of a formal analysis of the available studies.
MATERIALS AND METHODSStudy identification. The MEDLINE database (January 1999 to March 2005) was searched for clinical studies assessing the utility of anti-tTG ELISA in the diagnosis of CD. The search used the following strategy: (celiac disease) AND (tissue transglutaminase OR anti tissue transglutaminase OR anti-tTG OR tTG) AND ([sensitiv...