Table 1.
Prevalence [%] of recurrent aphthous stomatitis (RAS) in CeD patients vs. controls.
| Author (Year) | Country a | Pop. b | n c | % d |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Costacurta (2010) [19] | IT | C | 300 vs. 300 | 8.3 vs. 3.0% s |
| Acar (2012) [20] | TR | C | 35 vs. 35 | 37 vs. 11% s |
| Ertekin (2012) [21] | TR | C | 81 vs. 20 | 48 vs. 5% s |
| Cantekin (2012) [22] | TR | C | 25 vs. 25 | 44 vs. 0% s |
| Bramanti (2014) [11] | IT | C | 50 e vs. 54 | 52 vs. 7% s |
| De Carvalho (2015) [23] | BR | C | 52 vs. 52 | 40 vs. 17% s |
| Dane (2016) [24] | TR | C | 35 vs. 35 | 31 vs. 0% s |
| Saraceno (2016) [25] | IT | C | 83 vs. 83 | 69 vs. 43% s |
| Amato (2017) [26] | IT | A | 49 f vs. 51 | 53 vs. 26% s |
| Van Gils (2017) [10] | NL | A | 740 vs. 270 | 35 vs. 23% s |
| Shahraki (2019) [27] | IR | C | 65 vs. 60 | 17 vs. 13% ns |
| Alsadat (2021) [28] | SA | C | 104 vs. 104 | 42 vs. 15% s |
| Villemur Moreau (2021) [29] | FR | A | 28 vs. 59 | 50 vs. 22% s |
| Liu (2022) [30] | DK | A | 20 vs. 20 | 85 vs. 35% s |
| Ludovichetti (2022) [31] | IT | C | 38 vs. 38 | 24 vs. 8% s |
| Elbek-Cubukcu (2023) [32] | TR | C | 62 vs. 64 | 31 vs. 0% s |
a Country code ISO 3166-1. b C, children/adolescents; A, adults. c Number of subjects. d s, significant (p < 0.05); ns, non-significant (p > 0.05). e Ascertained CeD. f On a GFD.