Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming cardiovascular imaging, offering innovative solutions to enhance diagnostic precision, prognostic accuracy, and therapeutic decision-making. This review explores the role of AI in cardiovascular imaging, highlighting its applications, advantages, limitations, and future challenges. The discussion is structured by imaging modalities, including echocardiography, cardiac and coronary computed tomography, cardiac magnetic resonance, and nuclear cardiology. For each modality, we examine AI's contributions across the patient care continuum: from patient selection and image acquisition to quantitative and qualitative analysis, interpretation support, prognostic stratification, therapeutic guidance, and integration with other clinical data. AI applications demonstrate significant potential to streamline workflows, improve diagnostic accuracy, and provide advanced insights for complex clinical scenarios. However, several limitations must be addressed. Many AI algorithms are developed using data from single, high-expertise centers, raising concerns about their generalizability to routine clinical practice. In some cases, these algorithms may even produce misleading results. Additionally, the "black box" nature of certain AI systems poses challenges for cardiologists, making discrepancies difficult to interpret or rectify. Importantly, AI should be seen as a complementary tool rather than a replacement for cardiologists, designed to expedite routine tasks and allow clinicians to focus on complex cases. Future challenges include fostering clinician involvement in algorithm development and extending AI implementation to peripheral healthcare centers. This approach aims to enhance accessibility, understanding, and applicability of AI in everyday clinical practice, ultimately democratizing its benefits and ensuring equitable integration into healthcare systems.

Artificial intelligence (AI) in breast imaging has garnered significant attention given the numerous reports of improved efficiency, accuracy, and the potential to bridge the gap of expanded volume in the face of limited physician resources. While AI models are developed with specific data points, on specific equipment, and in specific populations, the real-world clinical environment is dynamic, and patient populations are diverse, which can impact generalizability and widespread adoption of AI in clinical practice. Implementation of AI models into clinical practice requires focused attention on the potential of AI bias impacting outcomes. The following review presents the concept, sources, and types of AI bias to be considered when implementing AI models and offers suggestions on strategies to mitigate AI bias in practice.

The present study performs a comprehensive fairness analysis of machine learning (ML) models for the diagnosis of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) from MRI-derived neuroimaging features. Biases associated with age, race, and gender in a multi-cohort dataset, as well as the influence of proxy features encoding these sensitive attributes, are investigated. The reliability of various fairness definitions and metrics in the identification of such biases is also assessed. Based on the most appropriate fairness measures, a comparative analysis of widely used pre-processing, in-processing, and post-processing bias mitigation strategies is performed. Moreover, a novel composite measure is introduced to quantify the trade-off between fairness and performance by considering the F1-score and the equalized odds ratio, making it appropriate for medical diagnostic applications. The obtained results reveal the existence of biases related to age and race, while no significant gender bias is observed. The deployed mitigation strategies yield varying improvements in terms of fairness across the different sensitive attributes and studied subproblems. For race and gender, Reject Option Classification improves equalized odds by 46% and 57%, respectively, and achieves harmonic mean scores of 0.75 and 0.80 in the MCI versus AD subproblem, whereas for age, in the same subproblem, adversarial debiasing yields the highest equalized odds improvement of 40% with a harmonic mean score of 0.69. Insights are provided into how variations in AD neuropathology and risk factors, associated with demographic characteristics, influence model fairness.

Advancements in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) analysis over the past decades have significantly reshaped the field of neuroradiology. The ability to extract multiple quantitative measures from each MRI scan, alongside the development of extensive data repositories, has been fundamental to the emergence of advanced methodologies such as radiomics and artificial intelligence (AI). This educational review aims to delineate the importance of image analysis, highlight key paradigm shifts, examine their implications, and identify existing constraints that must be addressed to facilitate integration into clinical practice. Particular attention is given to aiding junior neuroradiologists in navigating this complex and evolving landscape. A comprehensive review of the available analysis toolboxes was conducted, focusing on major technological advancements in MRI analysis, the evolution of data repositories, and the rise of AI and radiomics in neuroradiology. Stakeholders within the field were identified and their roles examined. Additionally, current challenges and barriers to clinical implementation were analyzed. The analysis revealed several pivotal shifts, including the transition from qualitative to quantitative imaging, the central role of large datasets in developing AI tools, and the growing importance of interdisciplinary collaboration. Key stakeholders-including academic institutions, industry partners, regulatory bodies, and clinical practitioners-were identified, each playing a distinct role in advancing the field. However, significant barriers remain, particularly regarding standardization, data sharing, regulatory approval, and integration into clinical workflows. While advancements in MRI analysis offer tremendous potential to enhance neuroradiology practice, realizing this potential requires overcoming technical, regulatory, and practical barriers. Education and structured support for junior neuroradiologists are essential to ensure they are well-equipped to participate in and drive future developments. A coordinated effort among stakeholders is crucial to facilitate the seamless translation of these technological innovations into everyday clinical practice.

The fetal origins of adult disease, widely known as Barker's Hypothesis, suggest that adverse fetal environments significantly impact the risk of developing chronic diseases, such as diabetes and cardiovascular conditions, in adulthood. Recent advancements in 4D ultrasound (4D US) and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies offer a promising avenue for improving prenatal diagnostics and validating this hypothesis. These innovations provide detailed insights into fetal behavior and neurodevelopment, linking early developmental markers to long-term health outcomes. This study synthesizes contemporary developments in AI-enhanced 4D US, focusing on their roles in detecting fetal anomalies, assessing neurodevelopmental markers, and evaluating congenital heart defects. The integration of AI with 4D US allows for real-time, high-resolution visualization of fetal anatomy and behavior, surpassing the diagnostic precision of traditional methods. Despite these advancements, challenges such as algorithmic bias, data diversity, and real-world validation persist and require further exploration. Findings demonstrate that AI-driven 4D US improves diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy, enabling earlier detection of fetal abnormalities and optimization of clinical workflows. By providing a more comprehensive understanding of fetal programming, these technologies substantiate the links between early-life conditions and adult health outcomes, as proposed by Barker's Hypothesis. The integration of AI and 4D US has the potential to revolutionize prenatal care, paving the way for personalized maternal-fetal healthcare. Future research should focus on addressing current limitations, including ethical concerns and accessibility challenges, to promote equitable implementation. Such advancements could significantly reduce the global burden of chronic diseases and foster healthier generations.

The rapid advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) carry the promise to reshape abdominal imaging by offering transformative solutions to challenges in disease detection, classification, and personalized care. AI applications, particularly those leveraging deep learning and radiomics, have demonstrated remarkable accuracy in detecting a wide range of abdominal conditions, including but not limited to diffuse liver parenchymal disease, focal liver lesions, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), renal tumors, and bowel pathologies. These models excel in the automation of tasks such as segmentation, classification, and prognostication across modalities like ultrasound, CT, and MRI, often surpassing traditional diagnostic methods. Despite these advancements, widespread adoption remains limited by challenges such as data heterogeneity, lack of multicenter validation, reliance on retrospective single-center studies, and the "black box" nature of many AI models, which hinder interpretability and clinician trust. The absence of standardized imaging protocols and reference gold standards further complicates integration into clinical workflows. To address these barriers, future directions emphasize collaborative multi-center efforts to generate diverse, standardized datasets, integration of explainable AI frameworks to existing picture archiving and communication systems, and the development of automated, end-to-end pipelines capable of processing multi-source data. Targeted clinical applications, such as early detection of PDAC, improved segmentation of renal tumors, and improved risk stratification in liver diseases, show potential to refine diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic planning. Ethical considerations, such as data privacy, regulatory compliance, and interdisciplinary collaboration, are essential for successful translation into clinical practice. AI's transformative potential in abdominal imaging lies not only in complementing radiologists but also in fostering precision medicine by enabling faster, more accurate, and patient-centered care. Overcoming current limitations through innovation and collaboration will be pivotal in realizing AI's full potential to improve patient outcomes and redefine the landscape of abdominal radiology.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly being integrated into the field of musculoskeletal (MSK) radiology, from research methods to routine clinical practice. Within the field of fracture detection, AI is allowing for precision and speed previously unimaginable. Yet, AI's decision-making processes are sometimes wrought with deficiencies, undermining trust, hindering accountability, and compromising diagnostic precision. To make AI a trusted ally for radiologists, we recommend incorporating clinical history, rationalizing AI decisions by explainable AI (XAI) techniques, increasing the variety and scale of training data to approach the complexity of a clinical situation, and active interactions between clinicians and developers. By bridging these gaps, the true potential of AI can be unlocked, enhancing patient outcomes and fundamentally transforming radiology through a harmonious integration of human expertise and intelligent technology. In this article, we aim to examine the factors contributing to AI inaccuracies and offer recommendations to address these challenges-benefiting both radiologists and developers striving to improve future algorithms.

As the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved use of artificial intelligence (AI) for medical imaging rises, radiologists are increasingly integrating AI into their clinical practices. In lung cancer screening, diagnostic AI offers a second set of eyes with the potential to detect cancer earlier than human radiologists. Despite AI's promise, a potential problem with its integration is the erosion of patient confidence in clinician expertise when there is a discrepancy between the radiologist's and the AI's interpretation of the imaging findings. We examined how discrepancies between AI-derived recommendations and radiologists' recommendations affect patients' agreement with radiologists' recommendations and satisfaction with their radiologists. We also analyzed how patients' medical maximizing-minimizing preferences moderate these relationships. We conducted a randomized, between-subjects experiment with 1606 US adult participants. Assuming the role of patients, participants imagined undergoing a low-dose computerized tomography scan for lung cancer screening and receiving results and recommendations from (1) a radiologist only, (2) AI and a radiologist in agreement, (3) a radiologist who recommended more testing than AI (ie, radiologist overcalled AI), or (4) a radiologist who recommended less testing than AI (ie, radiologist undercalled AI). Participants rated the radiologist on three criteria: agreement with the radiologist's recommendation, how likely they would be to recommend the radiologist to family and friends, and how good of a provider they perceived the radiologist to be. We measured medical maximizing-minimizing preferences and categorized participants as maximizers (ie, those who seek aggressive intervention), minimizers (ie, those who prefer no or passive intervention), and neutrals (ie, those in the middle). Participants' agreement with the radiologist's recommendation was significantly lower when the radiologist undercalled AI (mean 4.01, SE 0.07, P<.001) than in the other 3 conditions, with no significant differences among them (radiologist overcalled AI [mean 4.63, SE 0.06], agreed with AI [mean 4.55, SE 0.07], or had no AI [mean 4.57, SE 0.06]). Similarly, participants were least likely to recommend (P<.001) and positively rate (P<.001) the radiologist who undercalled AI, with no significant differences among the other conditions. Maximizers agreed with the radiologist who overcalled AI (β=0.82, SE 0.14; P<.001) and disagreed with the radiologist who undercalled AI (β=-0.47, SE 0.14; P=.001). However, whereas minimizers disagreed with the radiologist who overcalled AI (β=-0.43, SE 0.18, P=.02), they did not significantly agree with the radiologist who undercalled AI (β=0.14, SE 0.17, P=.41). Radiologists who recommend less testing than AI may face decreased patient confidence in their expertise, but they may not face this same penalty for giving more aggressive recommendations than AI. Patients' reactions may depend in part on whether their general preferences to maximize or minimize align with the radiologists' recommendations. Future research should test communication strategies for radiologists' disclosure of AI discrepancies to patients.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming radiology, with applications spanning disease detection, lesion segmentation, workflow optimization, and report generation. As these tools become more integrated into clinical practice, new concerns have emerged regarding their vulnerability to adversarial attacks. This review provides an in-depth overview of adversarial AI in radiology, a topic of growing relevance in both research and clinical domains. It begins by outlining the foundational concepts and model characteristics that make machine learning systems particularly susceptible to adversarial manipulation. A structured taxonomy of attack types is presented, including distinctions based on attacker knowledge, goals, timing, and computational frequency. The clinical implications of these attacks are then examined across key radiology tasks, with literature highlighting risks to disease classification, image segmentation and reconstruction, and report generation. Potential downstream consequences such as patient harm, operational disruption, and loss of trust are discussed. Current mitigation strategies are reviewed, spanning input-level defenses, model training modifications, and certified robustness approaches. In parallel, the role of broader lifecycle and safeguard strategies are considered. By consolidating current knowledge across technical and clinical domains, this review helps identify gaps, inform future research priorities, and guide the development of robust, trustworthy AI systems in radiology.