Bowel Preparation Burden, Rectal Pain and Abdominal Discomfort: Perspective of Participants Undergoing CT Colonography and Colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate bowel preparation burden, rectal pain and abdominal discomfort levels and to determine the association between demographic characteristics and those levels among participants undergoing CT colonography and colonoscopy. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in eligible Thai citizens who consented to participate all four visits of a free colorectal cancer screening protocol. Three levels (mild, moderate and severe) of burden, pain and discomfort were used to ask the perspective of participants at the final visit, one week after undergoing those two procedures. RESULTS: Data from 1,271 participants completed for analyses - females 815 (64.1%), males 456 (35.9%). The majority of participants experienced mild burden, pain and discomfort. Association between characteristic groups and burden levels differed regarding own income, chronic disease and laxative. Between characteristic groups and pain and discomfort levels differed regarding own income and chronic disease. Participants without their own income rated severe burden lower than those who had (p<0.001), but those without chronic disease rated moderate burden lower than who had (p=0.003). Participants prepared bowel with spilt-dose of PEG rated moderate burden higher than those who prepared with NaP (p<0.001). Participants undergoing CT colonography without their own income and presenting no chronic disease faced severe rectal pain lower than those who had (p<0.001 and p=0.04). Participants without their own income rated moderate and severe abdominal discomfort lower than those who had (p<0.01 and p=0.008). Participants undergoing colonoscopy without their own income and no chronic diseases faced severe rectal pain lower than those who had (p<0.001 and p=0.007). Participants without their own income and no chronic disease rated severe abdominal discomfort lower than those who had (p<0.001 and p=0.005). CONCLUSION: Evaluating the perspectives of customers alongside quality improvement and innovation to reduce unpleasant experiences remains needed in CT colonography and colonoscopy to promote CRC screening.

Patient centring and scan length: how inaccurate practice impacts on radiation dose in CT colonography (CTC).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to acknowledge errors in patients positioning in CT colonography (CTC) and their effect in radiation exposure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CTC studies of a total of 199 patients coming from two different referral hospitals were retrospectively reviewed. Two parameters have been considered for the analysis: patient position in relation to gantry isocentre and scan length related to the area of interest. CTDI vol and DLP were extracted for each patient. In order to evaluate the estimated effective total dose and the dose to various organs, we used the CT-EXPO® software version 2.2. This software provides estimates of effective dose and doses to the other various organs. RESULTS: Average value of the patients' position is found to be below the isocentre for 48 ± 25 mm and 29 ± 27 mm in the prone and supine position. It was observed that the increase in CTDI and DLP values for patients in Group 1, due to the inaccurate positioning, was estimated at about 30% and 20% for prone and supine position, respectively, while in Group 2, a decrease in CTDI and DLP values was estimated at about 16% and 18% for prone and supine position, respectively, due to an average position above isocentre. A dose increase ranging from 4 up to 13% was calculated with increasing the over-scanned region below anal orifice. CONCLUSION: Radiographers and radiologists need to be aware of dose variation and noise effects on vertical positioning and over-scanning. More accurate training need to be achieved even so when examination protocol varies from general practice.

Computed tomography colonography: a new threat to the spleen?

We present a rare and previously undocumented potential complication of computed tomography (CT) colonography. CT colonography is a commonly performed investigation with a relatively low risk of complications. While splenic injury is a well-documented complication after colonoscopy, it has never been reported following CT colonography. A 64-year-old man presented with severe abdominal pain four hours after CT colonography. CT of his abdomen and pelvis revealed appearances consistent with intra-abdominal bleeding secondary to splenic injury. The patient immediately underwent an emergency laparotomy and splenectomy, revealing a grade III splenic capsular tear. Histological evaluation of splenic tissue showed normal morphology with no evidence of malignancy. While the aetiology of the patient's splenic injury remains uncertain, normal histopathology and the chronology of events represents an almost certain link to CT colonography.

Short article: Willingness to undergo colonoscopy with virtual reality instead of procedural sedation and analgesia.

OBJECTIVE: This study explored the willingness of patients to start colonoscopy with virtual reality (VR) instead of procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA), as well as their motives and characteristics. There is a growing interest in colonoscopy without PSA. Offering VR as a distraction technique instead of PSA may increase the percentage of colonoscopies without PSA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A survey with demographic, colonoscopy-related and psychology-related questions was completed by 326 adults referred for colonoscopy with PSA. RESULTS: Overall, 25.7% reported to be willing to start with VR instead of PSA. Main reasons for this choice were receiving as little medication as possible, resuming daily life activities faster and participating in traffic independently afterwards. Logistic regression analysis showed that significant predictors of the willingness to use VR were male sex, higher educational level and absence of worries about the outcome of the colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: If VR turns out to be effective in the future, present results may be useful to customize patient information to help patients choosing VR.

Colon cancer screening with CT colonography: logistics, cost-effectiveness, efficiency and progress.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality can be significantly reduced by population screening. Several different screening methods are currently in use, and this review focuses specifically on the imaging technique computed tomographic colonography (CTC). The challenges and logistics of CTC screening, as well as the importance of test accuracy, uptake, quality assurance and cost-effectiveness will be discussed. With comparable advanced adenoma detection rates to colonoscopy (the most commonly used whole-colon investigation), CTC is a less-invasive alternative, requiring less laxative, and with the potential benefit that it permits assessment of extra colonic structures. Three large-scale European trials have contributed valuable evidence supporting the use of CTC in population screening, and highlight the importance of selecting appropriate clinical management pathways based on initial CTC findings. Future research into CTC-screening will likely focus on radiologist training and CTC quality assurance, with identification of evidence-based key performance indicators that are associated with clinically-relevant outcomes such as the incidence of post-test interval cancers (CRC occurring after a presumed negative CTC). In comparison to other CRC screening techniques, CTC offers a safe and accurate option that is particularly useful when colonoscopy is contraindicated. Forthcoming cost-effectiveness analyses which evaluate referral thresholds, the impact of extra-colonic findings and real-world uptake will provide useful information regarding the feasibility of future CTC population screening.

Patient tolerance and acceptance of different colonic imaging modalities: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Less invasive alternatives to optical colonoscopy (OC) may improve patient compliance with investigation, but study of patient preference is limited. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to determine patient tolerance and acceptability of OC, computed tomography colonography (CTC) and colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) and also to determine the choice of investigation made by fully informed members of the lay public. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients assigned a Gloucester Comfort Score (GCS, 1-5; as did endoscopists), an overall test experience score (visual analogue scale, 0-10) and completed a 'Friends and Family Test' following OC, CTC or CCE. In the second part of the study, members of the public were given information detailing the nature, tolerance, acceptability, risks and outcomes and invited to choose which test they would prefer in the event that one was needed. RESULTS: Assessed by endoscopist and patient, respectively, 24.2 and 49.3% (P<0.005) of symptomatic and 27.3 and 22.1% (P=0.4) of Bowel Cancer Screening Programme patients suffered moderate to severe discomfort (GCS: 4-5) [GCS (mean±SEM): 3.32±0.085, 1.96±0.083 and 1.30±0.088 (P<0.001); overall experience: 5.43, 2.35 and 3.80 (P<0.001)]. In all, 93.6, 96.1 and 85.7% of OC, CTC and CCE patients, respectively, were willing to undergo the same test under the same circumstances. The lay public (n=100) chose a noninvasive test (CTC or CCE) in 55% of the cases to investigate symptoms and chose a Bowel Cancer Screening Programme test in 29% of the cases (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Patient tolerance and experience favours CTC and CCE over OC and informed about all aspects of each procedure; a noninvasive option is commonly chosen by the lay public.

Evaluation of the benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of potential alternatives to iFOBT testing for colorectal cancer screening in Australia.

The Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) will fully roll-out 2-yearly screening using the immunochemical Faecal Occult Blood Testing (iFOBT) in people aged 50 to 74 years by 2020. In this study, we aimed to estimate the comparative health benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of screening with iFOBT, versus other potential alternative or adjunctive technologies. A comprehensive validated microsimulation model, Policy1-Bowel, was used to simulate a total of 13 screening approaches involving use of iFOBT, colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, computed tomographic colonography (CTC), faecal DNA (fDNA) and plasma DNA (pDNA), in people aged 50 to 74 years. All strategies were evaluated in three scenarios: (i) perfect adherence, (ii) high (but imperfect) adherence, and (iii) low adherence. When assuming perfect adherence, the most effective strategies involved using iFOBT (annually, or biennially with/without adjunct sigmoidoscopy either at 50, or at 54, 64 and 74 years for individuals with negative iFOBT), or colonoscopy (10-yearly, or once-off at 50 years combined with biennial iFOBT). Colorectal cancer incidence (mortality) reductions for these strategies were 51-67(74-80)% in comparison with no screening; 2-yearly iFOBT screening (i.e. the NBCSP) would be associated with reductions of 51(74)%. Only 2-yearly iFOBT screening was found to be cost-effective in all scenarios in context of an indicative willingness-to-pay threshold of A$50,000/life-year saved (LYS); this strategy was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of A$2,984/LYS-A$5,981/LYS (depending on adherence). The fully rolled-out NBCSP is highly cost-effective, and is also one of the most effective approaches for bowel cancer screening in Australia.

Flexible Sigmoidoscopy and CT Colonography Screening: Patients' Experience with and Factors for Undergoing Screening-Insight from the Proteus Colon Trial.

Purpose To compare the acceptability of computed tomographic (CT) colonography and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening and the factors predicting CT colonographic screening participation, targeting participants in a randomized screening trial. Materials and Methods Eligible individuals aged 58 years (n = 1984) living in Turin, Italy, were randomly assigned to be invited to screening for colorectal cancer with FS or CT colonography. After individuals who had died or moved away (n = 28) were excluded, 264 of 976 (27.0%) underwent screening with FS and 298 of 980 (30.4%) underwent CT colonography. All attendees and a sample of CT colonography nonattendees (n = 299) were contacted for a telephone interview 3-6 months after invitation for screening, and screening experience and factors affecting participation were investigated. Odds ratios (ORs) were computed by means of multivariable logistic regression. Results For the telephone interviews, 239 of 264 (90.6%) FS attendees, 237 of 298 (79.5%) CT colonography attendees, and 182 of 299 (60.9%) CT colonography nonattendees responded. The percentage of attendees who would recommend the test to friends or relatives was 99.1% among FS and 93.3% among CT colonography attendees. Discomfort associated with bowel preparation was higher among CT colonography than FS attendees (OR, 2.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.47, 5.24). CT colonography nonattendees were less likely to be men (OR, 0.36; 95% CI: 0.18, 0.71), retired (OR, 0.31; 95% CI: 0.13, 0.75), to report regular physical activity (OR, 0.37; 95% CI: 0.20, 0.70), or to have read the information leaflet (OR, 0.18; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.41). They were more likely to mention screening-related anxiety (mild: OR, 6.30; 95% CI: 2.48, 15.97; moderate or severe: OR, 3.63; 95% CI: 1.87, 7.04), erroneous beliefs about screening (OR, 32.15; 95% CI: 6.26, 165.19), or having undergone a recent fecal occult blood test (OR, 13.69; 95% CI: 3.66, 51.29). Conclusion CT colonography and FS screening are well accepted, but further reducing the discomfort from bowel preparation may increase CT colonography screening acceptability. Negative attitudes, erroneous beliefs about screening, and organizational barriers are limiting screening uptake; all these factors are modifiable and therefore potentially susceptible to interventions. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Adverse events during CT colonography for screening, diagnosis and preoperative staging of colorectal cancer: a Japanese national survey.

OBJECTIVES: To retrospectively evaluate the frequencies and magnitudes of adverse events associated with computed tomographic colonography (CTC) for screening, diagnosis and preoperative staging of colorectal cancer. METHODS: A Japanese national survey on CTC was administered by use of an online survey tool in the form of a questionnaire. The questions covered mortality, colorectal perforation, vasovagal reaction, total number of examinations, and examination procedures. The survey data was collated and raw frequencies were determined. Fisher's exact test was used to determine differences in event rates between groups. RESULTS: At 431 institutions, 147,439 CTC examinations were performed. No deaths were reported. Colorectal perforations occurred in 0.014% (21/147,439): 0.003% (1/29,823) in screening, 0.014% (13/91,007) in diagnosis and 0.028% (7/25,330) in preoperative staging. The perforation risk was significantly lower in screening than in preoperative staging CTC procedures (p = 0.028). Eighty-one per cent of perforation cases (17/21) did not require emergency surgery. Vasovagal reaction occurred in 0.081% (120/147,439): 0.111% (33/29,823) in screening, 0.088% (80/91,007) in diagnosis and 0.028% (7/25,330) in preoperative staging. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of colorectal perforation and vasovagal reaction in CTC is low. The frequency of colorectal perforation associated with CTC is least in the screening group and greatest in the preoperative-staging group. KEY POINTS: • The colorectal perforation rate during preoperative-staging CTC was 0.028 %. • The perforation rates for screening and diagnosis were 0.003 % and 0.014 %, respectively. • The perforation risk is significantly lower in screening than in preoperative staging. • Eighty-one per cent of perforation cases did not require emergency surgery. • Use of an automatic colon insufflator can reduce the risk of bowel perforation.

CT colonography: role in FOBT-based screening programs for colorectal cancer.

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a minimally invasive imaging examination for the colon, and is safe, well tolerated and accurate for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced adenoma. While the role of CTC as a primary test for population screening of CRC is under investigation, the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) has been recommended for population screening of CRC in Europe. Subjects with positive FOBT are invited to undergo total colonoscopy, which has some critical issues, such as suboptimal compliance, contraindications and the possibility of an incomplete exploration of the colon. Based on available data, the integration of CTC in FOBT-based population screening programs for CRC may fall into three scenarios. First, CTC is recommended in FOBT-positive subjects when colonoscopy is refused, incomplete or contraindicated. For these indications CTC should replace double-contrast barium enema. Second, conversely, CTC is not currently recommended as a second-level examination prior to colonoscopy in all FOBT-positive subjects, as this strategy is most probably not cost-effective. Finally, CTC may be considered instead of colonoscopy for surveillance after adenoma removal, but specific studies are needed.

The role of colonoscopy and CT colonography in patients presenting with symptoms of constipation.

OBJECTIVE: There is controversy whether constipation as a primary presenting complaint is an indication for diagnostic colonoscopy. CT colonography (CTC) is a less invasive and more acceptable alternative. We compared the completion and sensitivity of colonoscopy with CTC in patients who presented with the primary symptom of constipation. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted which examined the first 100 colonoscopies and 100 CTCs carried out for the primary symptom of constipation from June 2012 to December 2013. The primary outcome measure was failure rate of the investigations. Secondary outcomes included reasons for failure and comparison of cost effectiveness between the two modalities. RESULTS: A total of 200 patients were included in this study. Of these, the first consecutive 100 colonoscopies and 100 CTCs were included. One colonic cancer was detected in each of the CTC and the colonoscopy arm, respectively. 37 (37%) attempted colonoscopies were incomplete examinations. The most common reasons were discomfort (51.4%) and poor bowel preparation (27%). There was no failure of CTC. For 100 patients, CTC as a primary investigation was a more cost-effective investigation (p ≤ 0.01) costing £55,016 as compared with colonoscopy costing £73,666. CONCLUSION: There is an unacceptably high failure rate of colonoscopy in patients who presented with the primary symptom of constipation. Hence, we propose that CTC may be an acceptable first-line investigation with a further colonoscopy/flexible sigmoidoscopy if lesions are detected. Advances in knowledge: First study to examine the use of CTC in patients with constipation.

Pneumoperitoneo tras TAC-colonoscopia en paciente con colitis ulcerosa / Pneumoperitoneum after CT colonography in a patient with ulcerative colitis

No disponible

Incidental physiological sliding hiatal hernia: a single center comparison study between CT with water enema and CT colonography.

PURPOSE: Hiatal hernia is a well-known factor impacting on most mechanisms underlying gastroesophageal reflux, related with the risk of developing complications such as erosive esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus and ultimately, esophageal adenocarcinoma. It is our firm opinion that an erroneous reporting of hiatal hernia in CT exams performed with colonic distention may trigger a consecutive diagnostic process that is not only unnecessary, inducing a unmotivated anxiety in the patient, but also expensive and time-consuming for both the patient and the healthcare system. The purposes of our study were to determine whether colonic distention at CT with water enema and CT colonography can induce small sliding hiatal hernias and to detect whether hiatal hernias size modifications could be considered significant for both water and gas distention techniques. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 400 consecutive patients, 200 undergoing CT-WE and 200 undergoing CTC, including 59 subjects who also underwent a routine abdominal CT evaluation on a different time, used as internal control, while a separate group of 200 consecutive patients who underwent abdominal CT evaluation was used as external control. Two abdominal radiologists assessed the CT exams for the presence of a sliding hiatal hernia, grading the size as small, moderate, or large; the internal control groups were directly compared with the corresponding CT-WE or CTC study looking for a change in hernia size. We used the Student's t test applying a size-specific correction factor, in order to account for the effect of colonic distention: these "corrected" values were then individually compared with the external control group. RESULTS: A sliding hiatal hernia was present in 51 % (102/200) of the CT-WE patients and in 48.5 % (97/200) of the CTC patients. Internal control CT of the 31 patients with a hernia at CT-WE showed resolution of the hernia in 58.1 % (18/31) of patients, including 76.5 % (13/17) and 45.5 % (5/11) of small and moderate hernias. Comparison CT of the 28 patients with a hiatal hernia at CTC showed the absence of the hernia in 57.1 % (16/28) patients, including 68.8 % (11/16) and 50 % (5/10) of small and moderate hernias. The prevalence of sliding hiatal hernias in the external control group was 22 % (44/200), significantly lower than the CT-WE and CTC cohorts' prevalence of 51 % (p < 0.0001) and 48.5 % (p < 0.0001). After applying the correction factors for the CT-WE and the CTC groups, the estimated residual prevalences (16 and 18.5 %, respectively) were much closer to that of the external control patients (p = 0.160 for CT-WE and p = 0.455 for CTC). CONCLUSIONS: We believe that incidental findings at CT-WE and CTC should be considered according to the clinical background, and that small sliding hiatal hernias should not be reported in patients with symptoms not related to reflux disease undergoing CT-WE or CTC: When encountering these findings, accurate anamnesis and review of medical history looking for GERD-related symptoms are essential, in order to address these patients to a correct diagnostic iter, taking advantage from more appropriate techniques such as endoscopy or functional techniques.

CT colonography: accuracy, acceptance, safety and position in organised population screening.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cancer and second most common cause of cancer-related deaths in Europe. The introduction of CRC screening programmes using stool tests and flexible sigmoidoscopy, have been shown to reduce CRC-related mortality substantially. In several European countries, population-based CRC screening programmes are ongoing or being rolled out. Stool tests like faecal occult blood testing are non-invasive and simple to perform, but are primarily designed to detect early invasive cancer. More invasive tests like colonoscopy and CT colonography (CTC) aim at accurately detecting both CRC and cancer precursors, thus providing for cancer prevention. This review focuses on the accuracy, acceptance and safety of CTC as a CRC screening technique and on the current position of CTC in organised population screening. Based on the detection characteristics and acceptability of CTC screening, it might be a viable screening test. The potential disadvantage of radiation exposure is probably overemphasised, especially with newer technology. At this time-point, it is not entirely clear whether the detection of extracolonic findings at CTC is of net benefit and is cost effective, but with responsible handling, this may be the case. Future efforts will seek to further improve the technique, refine appropriate diagnostic algorithms and study cost-effectiveness.

Colon capsule versus CT colonography in patients with incomplete colonoscopy: a prospective, comparative trial.

OBJECTIVE: In case of incomplete colonoscopy, several radiologic methods have traditionally been used, but more recently, capsule endoscopy was also shown to be accurate. Aim of this study was to compare colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) and CT colonography (CTC) in a prospective cohort of patients with incomplete colonoscopy. DESIGN: Consecutive patients with a previous incomplete colonoscopy underwent CCE and CTC followed by colonoscopy in case of positive findings on either test (polyps/mass lesions ≥6 mm). Clinical follow-up was performed in the other cases to rule out missed cancer. CTC was performed after colon capsule excretion or 10-12 h postingestion. Since the gold standard colonoscopy was performed only in positive cases, diagnostic yield and positive predictive values of CCE and CTC were used as study end-points. RESULTS: 100 patients were enrolled. CCE and CTC were able to achieve complete colonic evaluation in 98% of cases. In a per-patient analysis for polyps ≥6 mm, CCE detected 24 patients (24.5%) and CTC 12 patients (12.2%). The relative sensitivity of CCE compared to CTC was 2.0 (95% CI 1.34 to 2.98), indicating a significant increase in sensitivity for lesions ≥6 mm. Of larger polyps (≥10 mm), these values were 5.1% for CCE and 3.1% for CTC (relative sensitivity: 1.67 (95% CI 0.69 to 4.00)). Positive predictive values for polyps ≥6 mm and ≥10 mm were 96% and 85.7%, and 83.3% and 100% for CCE and CTC, respectively. No missed cancer occurred at clinical follow-up of a mean of 20 months. CONCLUSIONS: CCE and CTC were of comparable efficacy in completing colon evaluation after incomplete colonoscopy; the overall diagnostic yield of colon capsule was superior to CTC. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01525940.

Perforación vaginal iatrogénica tras colonoscopia virtual / Latrogenic vaginal perforation after computed tomographic colonography

La colonoscopia virtual o colonografía por tomografía computarizada (TC) es una alternativa potencial a la colonoscopia convencional para la detección de pólipos y cáncer colorrectal. Presentamos un caso inusual de perforación iatrogénica vaginal durante una colonoscopia virtual. El paciente fue tratado con medidas conservadoras sin complicaciones. El presente caso es el primero en la literatura de perforación vaginal iatrogénica debido a la introducción del catéter de Foley a través de la vagina durante la realización de una colonografía por TC. La perforación vaginal es una complicación rara, fácilmente evitable con una correcta exploración clínica

Computed tomographic colonography is a potential alternative to conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps and cancers. We present an unusual case of iatrogenic vaginal perforation during a computed tomographic colonography. The patient was managed with conservative treatment without complications. The present case is the first in the literature of iatrogenic vaginal perforation due to the introduction of the Foley's catheter through vagina during the accomplishment of a computed tomographic colonography. Vaginal perforation is a rare complication, easily avoidable with a correct clinical exploration

Follow up by CT-colonoscopy of patients with colostoma after resection on the occasion of colorectal cancer.

The follow up of patients operated for colorectal cancer (CRC) and the early detection of recurrences and metachronous tumors improves significantly the results of treatment and the survival of the patients. Computed Tomography (CT) and fibro-colonoscopy (FCS) are the main applied image diagnostic methods for this aim. Alternative unified method is the CT colonoscopy (CTC -"virtual colonoscopy" ) with i.v. appliance of contrast. A particular group of patients liable to control are those after Miles and Hartmann operation with created colostoma. The performance of CTC and its informativeness in these cases is specific and represents a challenge. For a two-year period were implemented generally 48 "virtual colonoscopies" (CTC) in stoma patients--21 male and 27 female, average age 53.2 ± 9 years. The postoperative interval to the CTC varied 8 to 29 months. The studies were performed on a 32 detector CT - GE: 32 x 0.625mm and rotation time 0.6 sec. with automatic modulation of the dose. The CT images are processed with special software for CTC and analyzed according to standardized system for reporting of findings in CTC - C-RADS. The specific technique for CTC in stoma patients is described. CTC was entirely accomplished in all 48 cases (100%). The duration of the studies varied 10 to 25 min. (average 17 min.). No essential side effects or according to the procedure complications were marked. To one patient a conventional FCS was recommended for accurate assessment of a collapsed bowel segment. Adequate marking of the fecal odds with barium sulfate was marked in all cases. The CTC findings were assessed as normal in 23 cases (48%). In 25 patients (52%) were described pathologic findings of colonic and extra-colonic origin. Conclusions that CTC in patients operated according to the methods of Miles and Hartmann is technically feasible and could be executed for complex assessment of large bowel and extra-colonic abdominal structures. CTC possess the advantage of the possibility for synchronous assessment of the organs and structures in the abdominal cavity, which is economically profitable, saves time and psychical suspense for the patients and avoids the risk of complications and unpleasant experiences of the patient durinf a conventional FCS.