{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020369191597708464, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.834782608695652, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Imaging of congenital heart disease in adults: choice of modalities.

Major advances in noninvasive imaging of adult congenital heart disease have been accomplished. These tools play now a key role in comprehensive diagnostic work-up, decision for intervention, evaluation for the suitability of specific therapeutic options, monitoring of interventions and regular follow-up. Besides echocardiography, magnetic resonance (CMR) and computed tomography (CT) have gained particular importance. The choice of imaging modality has thus become a critical issue. This review summarizes strengths and limitations of the different imaging modalities and how they may be used in a complementary fashion. Echocardiography obviously remains the workhorse of imaging routinely used in all patients. However, in complex disease and after surgery echocardiography alone frequently remains insufficient. CMR is particularly useful in this setting and allows reproducible and accurate quantification of ventricular function and comprehensive assessment of cardiac anatomy, aorta, pulmonary arteries and venous return including complex flow measurements. CT is preferred when CMR is contraindicated, when superior spatial resolution is required or when "metallic" artefacts limit CMR imaging. In conclusion, the use of currently available imaging modalities in adult congenital heart disease needs to be complementary. Echocardiography remains the basis tool, CMR and CT should be added considering specific open questions and the ability to answer them, availability and economic issues.