Biesiekierski · Best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology 2025 · narrative review · n=?

Clinical utility of gluten restriction in gastrointestinal disorders: Evidence, practice, and reappraisal of non-coeliac gluten sensitivity.

Cited 2 times in the scientific literature.

Level 5 - mechanism / opinion, no new human data

Narrative review synthesizing mechanistic and clinical literature without systematic review protocol.

PubMed 41423308 · doi:10.1016/j.bpg.2025.102086 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

The authors synthesized mechanistic and clinical evidence evaluating gluten-free diets and gluten challenge studies in gastrointestinal disorders outside coeliac disease. They examined the validity of non-coeliac gluten sensitivity by evaluating the impact of fermentable carbohydrates (FODMAPs), expectation bias, and gut-brain interaction mechanisms, and developed clinical guidance for gluten restriction.

What was found

No quantitative findings or effect sizes were reported in the abstract. The review reported that reproducible gluten-specific symptom generation largely disappears once FODMAPs and expectation biases are controlled for in trials, meta-analyses demonstrate only modest and inconsistent symptom relief, and substantial nocebo responses and methodological heterogeneity undermine the construct of non-coeliac gluten sensitivity.

Why it matters

This reappraisal clarifies that symptoms attributed to gluten outside coeliac disease are frequently driven by carbohydrate fermentation, visceral hypersensitivity, or nocebo responses rather than gluten sensitivity itself. It emphasizes that a gluten-free diet should be reserved as a supervised, time-limited probe within multidisciplinary care rather than an unguided default therapy.

Limits

As a narrative review, the paper provides qualitative expert synthesis rather than a systematic review or meta-analysis. The abstract provides no sample sizes, specific trial counts, or quantitative metrics.

Cited by