Abstract
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading global cause of death, underscoring the need for improved strategies for early detection and prevention. Conventional risk models such as Framingham and SCORE estimate population-level risk but often fail to identify individuals with subclinical vascular damage. Atherosclerosis, the underlying cause of most CVDs, develops silently for decades, emphasizing the importance of imaging modalities capable of detecting early vascular changes. Ultrasound offers a safe, non-invasive, and radiation-free means to visualize vascular structure, function, and hemodynamics in real time. This perspective reframes ultrasound as a cornerstone of preventive and diagnostic vasculature medicine in general, and cardiovascular medicine in particular, emphasizing major modalities—point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS), Doppler, Duplex, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), elastography, and pulse wave velocity (PWV). These techniques enable early risk stratification, monitoring of atherosclerotic progression, and evaluation of therapeutic response across carotid, aortic, peripheral, coronary, cerebral, and renal arteries. Ultrasound also serves as a behavioral catalyst, enhancing patient awareness and engagement. However, widespread adoption requires standardized protocols, provider training, ethical oversight, and equitable implementation to avoid global disparities. Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and deep learning (DL) are revolutionizing ultrasound by automating plaque quantification, improving reproducibility, and expanding access through portable and handheld systems. Cloud-based interpretation and telemedicine integration further extend cardiovascular screening into community and home settings. As ultrasound evolves into a frontline technology for prevention, diagnosis, and monitoring, its integration with AI-driven interpretation and mobile health platforms positions it as a pivotal tool in personalized and equitable cardiovascular care.
1 Introduction
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death worldwide, accounting for an estimated 18 million deaths annually. Diverse CVD risk factors contribute to the progressive deterioration of the arterial vascular system, which in turn may lead to cardiovascular incidents (1–3). Conventional CVD risk scoring models, such as Framingham, SCORE, PCE, ARIC, and JHS studies, offer population-level predictions mainly focusing on a 10-year risk of CVD (4–8). However, these models lack precision at the individual level, often failing to identify patients at imminent or high risk, especially those with poor vascular health. Despite advances in therapeutic strategies, early and systematic monitoring of vascular changes—even before clinical symptoms appear—especially in vulnerable groups, may be essential for preventing CVD, facilitating early detection, effective treatment, and tailored intervention. This could potentially lead to a decrease in morbidity and mortality rates (9), but still remains an underutilized approach.
Atherosclerosis, the underlying pathology of most CVDs (10), begins silently, progresses over decades, and plays a pivotal role in the majority of deaths globally. Atherosclerosis is initiated by endothelial dysfunction, lipid accumulation, and chronic vascular inflammation (11). Emerging evidence suggests that it affects younger population, women, and a broader range of ethnic backgrounds to a greater extent than previously recognized (12). “Vascular failure” refers to a comprehensive syndrome of abnormal vascular function. It establishes atherosclerotic disease with serial events such as arterial stenosis, calcification of the vessel wall, and the consequences that plaque rupture and thromboembolic occlusion may cause (13). Physiological diagnostic criteria for several vascular functional tests, identifying possible subjects with vascular failure, were defined accordingly (14–17).
Clinical and research applications should utilize vasculature assessment modalities, which encompass key parameters related to blood vessel structure and function. Assessment of vascular structure, from anatomical perspective, refers to the arterial wall structure and thickness, as well as the calcifications and plaque characteristics. Evaluation of vascular function involves assessments of blood flow velocity, the condition and function of vascular endothelial, and blood vessels elasticity/stiffness. There is a wide range of advanced invasive and non-invasive cardiovascular assessment techniques. The latter are usually used for initial screening and for studies involving either large-scale epidemiological features or long-term follow-ups of low-risk patients. In contrast, the former are typically employed when precise data is required, or when the patient's situation is intricate or necessitates intervention. The choice of an assessment technique is driven by patient's condition and safety (susceptibility to physiological harm and psychological stress), the technique's complexity, availability, study design/management protocol, and resource requirements, etc. Therefore, non-invasive techniques are more commonly used. Among them, ultrasound stands out for its safety, accessibility, power, and versatility, solely or in combination with other modalities (18).
This perspective reframes ultrasound from a diagnostic tool to a foundational element of screening and preventive cardiovascular medicine. We emphasize clinical applications, highlight recent technological advancements, and identify systemic changes needed for widespread adoption. We also call for investment in multidisciplinary implementation and research to fully leverage its capabilities.
2 The subclinical landscape of atherosclerosis and ultrasound modalities
Ultrasound offers a cost-effective and real-time imaging of vascular structure and hemodynamics, allowing direct visualization of atherosclerotic changes without exposure to radiation or contrast agents (19). Its capacity to detect subclinical disease, particularly through carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) and plaque characterization, supports its role in early risk stratification. Moreover, high-frequency ultrasound enables more detailed imaging of superficial vessels, facilitating early-stage intervention. Nevertheless, it requires trained operators as poor technique, angle misalignment, poor acoustic windows, patient habitus (e.g., obesity), and calcification can degrade image or flow detection. Moreover, thresholds (e.g., velocity cutoffs) vary between devices, laboratories, stents vs. native vessels, etc., and better standardization is required. Ultrasound adoption across specialties is fragmented, and its inclusion in clinical guidelines is inconsistent.
Hereafter, we briefly list the diverse ultrasound modalities and their usage, highlighting recent advances. For complementary information on their strengths and limitations see Table 1.
Table 1
| Modality | Typical use | Type of information | Key Advantages | Key Limitations/Challenges |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| POCUS (Point-of-Care Ultrasound) | Emergency/critical care (DVT, AAA, trauma FAST), aimed at quick answer (Yes/No), rapid vascular access/interventions guidance, screening in primary/community care. | Anatomical (structure) | Portability and immediate availability, use at patient's bedside, rapid, low cost, integrating sonographic findings with medical history and clinical examination enabling real-time decision making. | Operator-dependent: need to establish formal training for general and emergency practitioners before independent use of POCUS (usually limited scans done by treating clinicians rather than radiology/sonography specialists), image quality depends on operator skills and machine type, only provides a limited field of view with lower image resolution and restricted depth penetration, often less quantitative, risk of missing subtle pathology. |
| Doppler Ultrasound (Color, Power, Spectral) | Assessing vascular stenosis (and its severity)/occlusion, venous thrombosis evaluation, hemodynamic monitoring. | Functional (flow) | Widely available and relatively inexpensive, quantifies velocity and direction, turbulence, quantifies severity of stenosis. | Limited in detecting small/deep vessels and reduced sensitivity for microvascular perfusion, flow artifacts, affected by calcification, dependency on angle and acoustic window, measurement thresholds may vary. |
| Duplex Ultrasound (B-mode + Doppler) | Carotid artery stenosis evaluation, peripheral artery disease (PAD), Venous insufficiency/mapping. | Anatomical (structure) and functional (flow) | Detailed assessment of arterial patency and blood flow, high accuracy for stenosis, non-invasive alternative to angiography. | Less optimal for calcified plaques that obscure the lumen, operator dependency and accuracy, which tend to be lower at centers with less exposure or experience, intensive and time-consuming. |
| CEUS (Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound) | Carotid plaque neovascularization, vascular graft surveillance, detection of endoleaks. | Anatomical (structure) | Better detection of difficult-to-visualize blood flow, perfusion, and microvascular vessels, detection of intra-plaque neovascularization and perfusion abnormalities in myocardial and peripheral blood vessels, improved sensitivity and specificity, real-time dynamic assessment, higher inter-observer agreement. | Requires contrast agents, which may contraindicate in rare allergy cases, limited availability, more expensive, offers fewer choices, sometimes restricted by acoustic windows or patient habitus, regulation/approval issues in some locales, has limited standardization, and is highly operator dependent. |
| Elastography (Strain, Shear Wave) | Carotid plaque vulnerability assessment | Vascular stiffness and functional (flow) | Quantitative, reproducible, evaluates localized direct tissue stiffness measurements and direct stiffness maps offering greater precision for specific regions and lesions. | Artifacts (body movements and sound distortions, limited depth penetration—particularly in obese patients), machine/vendor variability, reliance on the operator, overlap between benign/malignant stiffness values. |
| PWV (Pulse Wave Velocity) | Cardiovascular risk stratification, monitoring vascular aging/intervention effects | Vascular stiffness | Quantifies arterial stiffness (CV risk marker), reproducible, can track treatment response, ultrafast ultrasound is effective, user-friendly. | Provides global stiffness rather than local pathology, requires special equipment, influenced by blood pressure, age and BMI, IMT and transducer type—thus all should be considered in clinical practice. |
Key features of non-invasive ultrasound modalities.
Point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS): is a diagnostic ultrasonography usually performed and interpreted at bedside by the attending physician, rather than radiology/sonography specialists (20). Recent evidence supports the use of POCUS for diagnosing abdominal aortic aneurysm and deep venous thrombosis of lower extremities (21). POCUS of carotid arteries is a highly sensitive and specific method for detecting carotid atherosclerosis, specifically among apparently healthy subjects with high and very high CVD risk (22).
Doppler ultrasound: uses the Doppler effect to assess the movement of blood or fluid. It gives information on flow velocity and direction. Diverse modalities—such as color Doppler or spectral Doppler, etc.—are available. Doppler velocities can support quantifying the severity of stenosis, etc (23–25). Carotid ultrasound is the primary non-invasive method for detecting, grading, and monitoring internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis (26). Methods that were developed in the last decade add another dimension to ultrasound effectiveness in accessing microvascular flows (27).
Duplex ultrasound: refers to the combination of anatomic imaging and flow measurement by Doppler, which enables a detailed assessment of arterial patency and blood flow, specifically by adding functional information to anatomical imaging. Duplex ultrasonography is very useful in the follow-up of patients who underwent endovascular treatment (28–30). Recently, duplex ultrasound was used to establish normal diameter and depth values for the common femoral vasculature (31). Furthermore, renal resistive index (RRI) was established as a marker of overall cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients, independent of renal function (32), using duplex ultrasound.
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): uses injected micro-bubble contrast agents to enhance the contrast between vessels and background, thus improving vascular imaging sensitivity of blood vessels and plaque characteristics (33, 34). CEUS is especially valuable in evaluating difficult-to-visualize vascular territories in patients with high body mass index (BMI). CEUS has been shown to be valuable for evaluating intraplaque neovascularization (IPN) within vulnerable plaques in carotid arteries (35).
CEUS is recommended for surveillance and follow-up of abdominal aortic aneurysm endovascular repair and for imaging of suspected chronic mesenteric ischemia (36).
Elastography: assesses tissue stiffness, offering insights into plaque composition and vulnerability (37). Plaques that are softer and rich in lipids are more prone to rupture, whereas those that are calcified tend to be more stable (38). Of note, real-time elastographic mapping is influenced by interference from body movements and sound distortions caused by breathing, heartbeat, body fat and gas, and difficulties in measuring tissue stiffness in some patients, particularly those who are obese (due to limited depth penetration) (37). Shear wave elastography (SWE) is useful for measuring arterial stiffness and myocardial stiffness (38, 39).
Pulse wave velocity (PWV): refers to the speed at which pressure waves travel along the walls of large arteries, generated by the heart's ejection of blood during each cardiac cycle. It serves as a key indicator of arterial stiffness, determined by measuring pressure or vessel diameter at two separate arterial sites (40). Of note, age, blood pressure, and BMI are all independently linked to carotid PWV. Also, IMT and transducer type affect the ability to obtain an ultrafast PWV measurement. Thus, both should be considered in clinical practice (41, 42). Recent studies found that PWV was positively associated with the risk of cardio-cerebrovascular disease (and mortality), making it a reliable and innovative predictor of these conditions (43) and a marker for arterial stiffness (44). The usefulness and accuracy of PWV in predicting cardiovascular and all-cause mortality (45), as well as in detecting coronary artery disease (CAD) (46), have already been established among high-risk populations or and among individuals with suspected disease.
While PWV is considered the gold standard for assessing overall arterial stiffness, elastography provides a complementary approach by evaluating tissue stiffness through the propagation of mechanical waves within the tissue. Unlike PWV, which reflects global arterial properties, elastography yields localized, direct stiffness measurements and detailed stiffness maps, potentially offering greater precision for specific regions such as the aorta (47, 48).
Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) (49) enables individualized assessment of the anti-atherosclerotic therapies, and advanced tissue characterization allows direct risk stratification of coronary lesions, for example through virtual histology IVUS (50). In addition to IVUS, other intravascular modalities—such as optical coherence tomography (OCT) and near-infrared spectroscopy—enable the detection of lipid-rich plaques and demonstrated high accuracy in identifying high-risk coronary lesions (51). Nevertheless, invasive ultrasound modalities, ultrasound techniques not relevant to the cardiovascular system, and non-ultrasound imaging techniques are beyond the scope of this article.
The choice of ultrasound modality in cardiovascular care is driven by both the features of the modalities and the clinical needs. POCUS, preferably with Doppler if feasible, is best suited for screening and making quick bedside decisions. For quantifying the severity of stenosis/inflow/outflow vascular disease, one would prefer Duplex ultrasound. CEUS, used independently or combined with Doppler or Duplex, is particularly effective for monitoring grafts or stents, for detecting endoleaks or restenosis, and gaining insights into microvascular flow, and hemodynamic patterns. It is also superior for identifying plaque characteristics or assessing risk factors, such as plaque ulceration and neovascularization. For assessing vascular stiffness, PWV and elastography are the methods of choice; the former is usually used for general vascular stiffness, whereas the latter is better for assessing local vascular stiffness. In the following section, we will dive into specific cardiovascular care cases.
3 Clinical applications of ultrasound in cardiovascular care
3.1 Carotid IMT and plaque imaging
Carotid IMT/plaque is a validated surrogate marker for systemic atherosclerosis and is predictive of myocardial infarction and stroke (52). Plaque presence and morphology, including echolucency and irregular surfaces, further refine risk stratification (53, 54). Traditional ultrasound provides more detailed information than traditional risk scores alone (5, 55), though it offers only modest sensitivity.
CEUS enhances the detection of neovascularization within plaques, a marker of vulnerability (56, 57). CEUS improves delineation of lumen boundaries and highlights ulcerations and thrombi—features associated with higher risk (58). The development of real-time plaque strain imaging may also offer future risk prediction potential.
3.2 Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening
Abdominal ultrasound is the gold standard for detecting AAA, particularly in asymptomatic men over aged 65–75 years, especially those with a history of smoking. Screening is also recommended for women aged 65–75 years who have ever smoked or who have a family history of AAA. Population screening programs have reduced AAA-related mortality and shown to be cost-effective (59, 60).
Ultrasound is also central to post-endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) surveillance, where it is used to detect endoleaks, assess graft integrity, and monitor aneurysm size (61). Advanced Doppler techniques allow for improved hemodynamic assessment in aneurysm surveillance.
3.3 Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) evaluation
Duplex ultrasound enables a detailed assessment of arterial patency and blood flow in the lower extremities. It identifies the site and severity of the obstruction and it provides information on revascularization strategies (62). Its role extends to follow-up after interventions, where it can detect restenosis or graft failure. While systemic mapping of peripheral arteries may be time-consuming, miniaturized portable duplex probes may offer a solution.
3.4 Coronary and cerebral vasculature
Although limited in imaging distal coronary arteries, recent developments in ultrafast ultrasound and CEUS have enhanced visualization of proximal segments and perfusion dynamics (63, 64). Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), when optimized, can visualize all three major coronary arteries in selected patients (65–67).
Transcranial Doppler (TCD) remains a useful tool in evaluating cerebral hemodynamics, emboli detection, and intracranial stenosis. However, its utility is limited by poor acoustic windows and operator dependency (68–70). Advances in contrast agents and multiplanar insonation may enhance TCD's diagnostic value.
3.5 Renal arteries
The duplex ultrasound is commonly used to assess the renal blood vessels and is successful in identifying renal artery stenosis (RAS) (71). CEUS has also displayed high diagnostic accuracy for pinpointing RAS when compared with angiography (72).
Ultrasound's ability to visualize various vascular beds varies based on anatomical depth (including skull thickness), acoustic window availability, technique, and sometimes also patient demographics. Understanding these anatomical and technical nuances is essential for optimizing ultrasound preventive utility in identifying subclinical vascular disease across diverse patient populations (Table 2).
Table 2
| Arteries | Methods | Success rates (SR) | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Middle Cerebral Arteries (MCA) | TCD | SRs ranging 65%–81%, with sensitivity >90% and specificity of 100% for MCA stenosis | (69, 70, 124) |
| Coronary Arteries | TTE | SR of proximal left main coronary artery (LMCA): 86%; left anterior descending artery (LADA): 86%; right coronary artery (RCA): 90%, while circumflex artery remains more challenging, demonstrating only 30%. Pediatric visualization rates reach ∼95%. | (63, 65) |
| AAA & Iliac Arteries | Ultrasound | AAA detection sensitivity exceeds 95%. Robotic ultrasound platforms demonstrate 100% accuracy in pilot studies. | (59, 60) |
| Renal Arteries | Duplex ultrasound | Proximal renal artery stenosis (RAS): ∼90%–95% sensitivity and 85%–90% specificity, with full artery course visualization in 65%–76%. | (125–128) |
| CEUS | High overall diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity to detect RAS were noted (comparable to the corresponding values of angiography). | (72) | |
| Mesenteric & Celiac Arteries | Duplex ultrasound | Sensitivity, specificity and overall accuracy for superior mesenteric artery (SMA), celiac artery (CA) and inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) stenosis (>50%) were 90%/91%/91%, 93%/100%/95% and 90%/96%/95%, respectively. | (129, 130) |
| Peripheral Lower Limb Arteries | Duplex ultrasound | Sensitivity and specificity for significant stenosis (>50%) are ≥85%–90%. Sensitivity and specificity of Duplex ultrasound for the diagnosis of arterial lesions in the entire lower limb 88% (80–98%) and 96% (89–99%) | (28, 131) |
Major arteries visualization success rates by ultrasound.
4 Monitoring atherosclerosis progression and therapeutic response
The non-invasive and repeatable nature of ultrasound makes it ideal for serial assessments. Changes in IMT or plaque size can reflect the effects of lipid-lowering, antihypertensive, or antidiabetic therapies (73). Ultrasound is used to track vessel patency, flow dynamics, and potential complications in post-revascularization care.
Its utility extends to high-risk populations, such as patients with familial hypercholesterolemia or diabetes, where close monitoring may influence therapeutic decisions. Moreover, integration with electronic health records enables longitudinal tracking of vascular changes, improving real-world clinical utility.
5 Advances in vascular ultrasound
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been increasingly employed to revolutionize prevention, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis predication and risk assessment, clinical care, and drug discovery in the field of cardiovascular medicine (74, 75).
Combining advanced algorithmic approaches like AI, machine learning (ML), deep learning (DL), automation, and pattern recognition into sonographic analysis allows for new vascular imaging opportunities—from image acquisition, automation, segmentation and interpretation, through diagnostics, therapy planning, and prognostication, and to integration with other clinical data while enhancing accessibility, accuracy, speeding up analysis and reporting, and reducing the workload (76–82). ML, a subset of AI, employs algorithms capable of identifying patterns within training data and applying them to generate accurate predictions for new data. DL, an advanced branch of ML, leverages multi-layered neural networks to process complex inputs, such as medical images, text, and audio, thereby improving the precision, range and scope of image interpretation (83). AI-based systems for cardiovascular imaging might be viewed as a tool to augment clinical decision-making and improve workflow efficiency (79). Yet, despite the promises of AI application to cardiovascular imaging, some challenges remain (79–82, 84).
5.1 Ultrasound modalities, AI and CVD diagnosis
AI has numerous applications in echocardiography, including guided image acquisition for optimal imaging, automated quantification of cardiac function, and disease detection and classification. It can also enhance strain analysis and 3D echocardiography, improve risk stratification, and optimize clinical workflow, potentially leading to faster, more accurate assessments, and streamlined decision-making. Moreover, AI algorithms can cross-reference imaging results from echocardiography, cardiac computed tomography (CCT), or cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) with a patient's clinical records, lab results, and genetic information thus organizing vast amounts of information into a more interpretable format and aiding physicians to reach correct diagnosis (82, 85–87).
AI-enabled systems can reduce operator dependency, improve image quality, and promote consistency across diverse clinical environments. Challenges include algorithm generalizability, bias, explainability, clinician trust, and data privacy. Standardized development, ethical oversight, and clinician-AI collaboration are crucial for effective implementation. Emerging innovations-such as autonomous scanning, real-time predictive analytics, tele-ultrasound, and patient-performed imaging-underscore the transformative potential of AI-enabled POCUS in reshaping cardiovascular care and advancing equitable healthcare delivery worldwide (88).
The feasibility, applicability and accuracy of AI in the detection of carotid artery disease in greyscale static duplex ultrasound images have been demonstrated (89).
CEUS is indispensable in AAA screening and post-endovascular aortic aneurysm repair surveillance, especially in patients with renal impairment. Emerging technologies, including hybrid imaging, radiomics, and AI enhance detection of subtle imaging features, automate measurements, and may enable prediction of disease progression or complications (90).
AI-based models, with elastography, have shown strong risk predictive capabilities of Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease (MASLD)—a predictor of metabolic changes associated with atherosclerosis risk as well as future liver conditions such as cirrhosis (91).
Real-time assessment of vascular stiffness, pulse wave patterns, enable early cerebrovascular compromise-detection previously inaccessible with traditional, intermittent evaluation methods. By integrating AI with enhanced, continuous data acquisition from the carotid artery, new diagnostic and predictive pathways enable, precision-based care and improved patient outcomes such as stroke prevention, by real-time cerebrovascular monitoring, and broader vascular assessment (92).
5.2 AI driven interpretation and 3D imaging
AI algorithms reduce operator variability and enhance diagnostic consistency by automating plaque measurements and flow analysis (93, 94). Three-dimensional ultrasound facilitates volumetric plaque assessment, improving reproducibility and clinical confidence. Cloud-based AI platforms may soon enable remote expert consultation (95).
5.3 AI, ML and DL algorithms for quantitative imaging
Automated segmentation algorithms facilitate consistent measurement of cardiac chambers, ejection fraction, and wall motion abnormalities while minimizing operator dependence (96, 97). These algorithms also enable reproducible quantification of vascular structures, which supports the widespread adoption of carotid IMT as a biomarker for atherosclerosis. Automated IMT measurement decreases inter-observer variability and enhances its utility in large-scale screening for risk stratification (98, 99).
ML models can also support predictive analytics by integrating ultrasound findings with clinical data to refine cardiovascular risk assessment. Quantitative ultrasound phenotyping, such as speckle-tracking strain analysis, combined with AI-based interpretation, has demonstrated potential for the early detection of subclinical myocardial dysfunction and vascular stiffening (100, 101).
DL in CVD diagnosis, treatment planning, and prognostic modeling, can reduce unnecessary diagnostic imaging, predict high-cost complications, and optimize the utilization of critical resources like intensive care unit (ICU) beds (102).
5.4 Automated plaque characterization
Plaque morphology, rather than luminal stenosis alone, is now recognized as a critical cardiovascular risk determinant. While conventional ultrasound offers grayscale and Doppler data, AI-enhanced plaque characterization enables the automated classification of plaques as stable or vulnerable by analyzing echogenicity, surface irregularity, and neovascularization patterns. ML algorithms trained on extensive image datasets have demonstrated high accuracy in detecting lipid-rich or ulcerated plaques, which are predictive of ischemic events (103, 104). These technological advances may facilitate scalable, non-invasive monitoring of atherosclerotic disease progression for primary prevention. Furthermore, use of AI technology for the segmentation of plaques in ultrasound images, and analysis of radiomics models, to determine stability of carotid artery plaques, provides a diagnostic basis for the clinical prediction of ischemic stroke (105). AI-based methods for IMT and plaque area segmentation—including detection and measurement from ultrasound images by ML and DL—have emerged for CVD/stroke risk monitoring and for atherosclerosis assessment, of both the carotid (106, 107) and coronary arteries (108).
5.5 Pattern recognition in CEUS and Doppler imaging
Currently, AI-driven pattern recognition is applied to CEUS time–intensity curves and Doppler spectral signatures, enabling the automated detection of abnormal perfusion or turbulent flow patterns (109, 110). Preliminary studies have indicated that these tools can assist in identifying unstable plaques and optimizing triage for invasive angiography or intervention. These methods are particularly promising for community screening programs with limited access to specialist expertise.
5.6 Portable and handheld devices supported by AI tools
Nowadays, portable and handheld ultrasound devices are examples of cost-effective mobile health technology in the hands of physicians, alongside digital stethoscopes, etc. (111). These devices provide diagnostic accuracy comparable to conventional systems in assessing left ventricular dysfunction, valvular disease, basic vascular imaging, and in detecting several pathologies (112–114). These systems also support treatment decisions based on feedback from image acquisition and interpretation processes (115), as they enable asynchronous consultation, with images uploaded for review by specialists, reducing inequities in access to cardiovascular imaging (116, 117). However, they are limited by a narrow field of view, inadequate penetration, and poor visualization of solid organ parenchymal disease.
The incorporation of AI, encompassing DL and ML, into portable and handheld compact ultrasound systems—either through on-device integration or cloud-based interpretation via smartphone connectivity—represents a significant advancement. This approach enhances diagnostic capabilities, facilitates remote monitoring, supports teleconsultation, and enables non-specialists to perform reliable community-based screenings, namely real-time image acquisition, transmission, and cloud-based interpretation (93, 114), thereby expanding the clinical impact of ultrasound technologies, particularly in underserved or geographically remote settings. These devices coupled with AI guidance are critical for democratizing access to vascular health technologies.
6 Ultrasound in preventive cardiology and risk reclassification
Ultrasound refines cardiovascular risk estimation by identifying patients with subclinical atherosclerosis not captured by conventional models (68, 118). Studies have shown that carotid plaque detection can reclassify 10%–20% of patients at intermediate risk to a higher risk category, altering management strategies (119).
As demonstrated in pregnancy care, the potential for democratizing ultrasound self-screening in the population is now feasible (120). Screening for endovascular pathology and AAA can be performed by local village health care workers in third world countries, or as a neighborhood project in any country, thanks to combined small and low-cost ultrasound transducers and government-supported software that employs AI guidance, running on personal electronic devices, to replicate the correct views and automated results (88).
Incorporating ultrasound metrics into existing algorithms could enhance risk discrimination and individualize preventive therapy, aligning with personalized medicine initiatives. Integration of vascular ultrasound findings into digital health platforms for shared decision-making should be explored in future efforts.
7 Ultrasound as a behavioral catalyst
Clinical guidelines have increasingly recognized the role of vascular ultrasound, recommending its use for risk assessment, screening, and monitoring in selected populations (121). Recent literature advocates for even more comprehensive vascular evaluations and multidisciplinary approaches, positioning ultrasound as a cornerstone of modern vascular medicine (9). We propose the integration of ultrasound imaging, using standardized protocols, via cross-disciplinary collaborations, into care pathways of patient counseling sessions to enhance awareness and engagement in disease prevention. Clinicians should receive communication training to effectively convey ultrasound findings and their implications. Recently, an imaging-based cardiovascular risk-reduction program (WAKE UP) was established to raise awareness of women's CVD and promoting lifestyle changes (122). In this longitudinal, prospective, case-control study, vascular ultrasound imaging—including 2D assessment of the carotid, aorto-iliac, and femoral arteries and 3D evaluation of any detected plaques—can help identify subclinical atherosclerosis in a visible and actionable way, potentially motivating greater adherence to preventive strategies among women with plaques.
7.1 Implementation and equity considerations
Despite these technological advances, deployment remains uneven. Handheld and AI-supported ultrasound is uniquely positioned to extend diagnostic capability into underserved communities with high CVD burden. Pilot programs have demonstrated the feasibility of community-based vascular and cardiac screening using mobile ultrasound units or task-shared protocols (121, 123).
However, widespread adoption requires not only technical validation but also sustainable integration into healthcare systems and robust quality assurance. Training non-specialist providers in POCUS is a growing trend, with family physicians, emergency doctors, and paramedics increasingly performing basic cardiovascular assessments under remote supervision (9).
Ensuring equitable deployment is challenging—while handheld devices are inexpensive relative to traditional systems, sustainable financing and infrastructure support are required to avoid widening global disparities.
7.2 Ethical and regulatory challenges
The rapid expansion of cardiovascular ultrasound raises important ethical and regulatory considerations. Overdiagnosis and misdiagnosis are both potential harms, particularly when AI tools are applied without sufficient clinical oversight. False positives may generate unnecessary anxiety and downstream testing, whereas false negatives could delay care. Regulatory frameworks for handheld devices and AI-based interpretation remain fragmented, with insufficient guidance available on validation, liability, and their integration into clinical practice (34, 64).
8 Future directions and concluding remarks
Ultrasound has evolved from being a supplementary diagnostic tool to a versatile modality in the prevention, diagnosis, and longitudinal monitoring of CVD. Its combination of safety, accessibility, and adaptability positions it as a pivotal technology in addressing the global burden of atherosclerosis.
Cardiovascular ultrasound is undergoing a profound transformation fueled by technological innovation, device miniaturization, and the integration of AI. Once confined to specialized hospital settings, ultrasound is now moving closer to the patient — into point-of-care environments, community clinics, and even homes. This shift carries major implications for screening, diagnosis, monitoring, and the delivery of personalized cardiovascular care.
To fully realize its potential, further work is needed to validate AI-driven interpretation platforms, automate IMT and plaque quantification, evaluate cost-effectiveness across diverse health systems, and assess the long-term impact of ultrasound-based counseling. The feasibility of home-based or self-administered vascular ultrasound also warrants exploration, particularly in conjunction with wearable biosensors for real-time cardiovascular monitoring.
As cardiovascular ultrasound evolves into a frontline tool, balancing technological progress with responsible deployment will shape its ultimate role in global cardiovascular prevention and care. Ethical oversight, regulatory clarity, and equitable implementation are critical to ensuring that innovation translates into meaningful health benefits. With coordinated efforts in research, guideline integration, training, and innovation, ultrasound has the potential to become a true cornerstone of personalized cardiovascular medicine.
Statements
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Author contributions
YC: Visualization, Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Supervision. DF: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft. YM: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Conceptualization.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was not received for this work and/or its publication.
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1.
Mensah GA Fuster V Murray CJL Roth GA . Global burden of cardiovascular diseases and risks, 1990–2022. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2023) 82(25):2350–473. 10.1016/j.jacc.2023.11.007
2.
Vaduganathan M Mensah GA Turco JV Fuster V Roth GA . The global burden of cardiovascular diseases and risk: a compass for future health. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2022) 80(25):2361–71. 10.1016/j.jacc.2022.11.005
3.
Roth GA Mensah GA Johnson CO Addolorato G Ammirati E Baddour LM et al Global burden of cardiovascular diseases and risk factors, 1990–2019: update from the GBD 2019 study. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2020) 76(25):2982–3021. 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.11.010
4.
Budoff MJ Dowe D Jollis JG Gitter M Sutherland J Halamert E et al Diagnostic performance of 64-multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without known coronary artery disease: results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (assessment by coronary computed tomographic angiography of individuals undergoing invasive coronary angiography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2008) 52(21):1724–32. 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.07.031
5.
Sillesen H Fuster V . Predicting coronary heart disease: from Framingham risk score to ultrasound bioimaging. Mt Sinai J Med. (2012) 79(6):654–63. 10.1002/msj.21343
6.
Karmali KN Persell SD Perel P Lloyd-Jones DM Berendsen MA Huffman MD . Risk scoring for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. (2017) 3(3):Cd006887. 10.1002/14651858.CD006887.pub4
7.
Goff DC Jr. Lloyd-Jones DM Bennett G Coady S D'Agostino RB Gibbons R et al 2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the assessment of cardiovascular risk: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines. Circulation. (2014) 129(25 Suppl 2):S49–73. 10.1161/01.cir.0000437741.48606.98
8.
Fox ER Samdarshi TE Musani SK Pencina MJ Sung JH Bertoni AG et al Development and validation of risk prediction models for cardiovascular events in black adults: the Jackson heart study cohort. JAMA Cardiol. (2016) 1(1):15–25. 10.1001/jamacardio.2015.0300
9.
Chaiter Y Fink DL Machluf Y . Vascular medicine in the 21(st) century: embracing comprehensive vasculature evaluation and multidisciplinary treatment. World J Clin Cases. (2024) 12(27):6032–44. 10.12998/wjcc.v12.i27.6032
10.
Gibbons GH Seidman CE Topol EJ . Conquering atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease—50 years of progress. N Engl J Med. (2021) 384(9):785–8. 10.1056/NEJMp2033115
11.
Ross R . Atherosclerosis–an inflammatory disease. N Engl J Med. (1999) 340(2):115–26. 10.1056/NEJM199901143400207
12.
Libby P . The changing landscape of atherosclerosis. Nature. (2021) 592(7855):524–33. 10.1038/s41586-021-03392-8
13.
Inoue T Node K . Vascular failure: a new clinical entity for vascular disease. J Hypertens. (2006) 24(11):2121–30. 10.1097/01.hjh.0000249684.76296.4f
14.
Tanaka A Tomiyama H Maruhashi T Matsuzawa Y Miyoshi T Kabutoya T et al Physiological diagnostic criteria for vascular failure. Hypertension. (2018) 72(5):1060–71. 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.11554
15.
Tanaka A Tomiyama H Maruhashi T Matsuzawa Y Miyoshi T Kabutoya T et al Official announcement of physiological diagnostic criteria for vascular failure from the Japanese society for vascular failure. Vasc Failure. (2018) 2(2):59–60. 10.30548/vascfail.2.2_59
16.
Tanaka A Node K . Better vascular function tests in cardiovascular care: learning from evidence and providing improved diagnostics to the patient. Hypertens Res. (2022) 45(3):538–40. 10.1038/s41440-021-00841-9
17.
Tanaka A Toyoda S Node K . Vascular functional tests and preemptive medicine. Hypertens Res. (2021) 44(1):117–9. 10.1038/s41440-020-00546-5
18.
Kubale R Stiegler H Weskott H-P . Vascular Ultrasound: B-Mode, Color Doppler and Duplex Ultrasound, Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound. Leipzig: Georg Thieme Verlag (2023).
19.
Özhan Oktar S Cerit MN Şendur HN Karabörk Kılıç AC . Recent advances in vascular ultrasound imaging technology and their clinical implications. Diagn Interv Radiol. (2025) 32(1):47. 10.4274/dir.2025.253448
20.
Hashim A Tahir MJ Ullah I Asghar MS Siddiqi H Yousaf Z . The utility of point of care ultrasonography (POCUS). Ann Med Surg. (. 2021) 71:102982. 10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102982
21.
Chrusch MJ Phan P Fischer EA . Vascular point-of-care ultrasound. Med Clin North Am. (2025) 109(1):105–20. 10.1016/j.mcna.2024.08.007
22.
Kebrič A Petek Šter M Poljanšek Avsenak A Jug B . Point-of-care ultrasonography of carotid arteries in primary care: sensitivity and specificity of identification of carotid atherosclerosis and prevalence of carotid atherosclerosis in apparently healthy subjects with high and very high cardiovascular disease risk. BMC Prim Care. (2025) 26(1):244. 10.1186/s12875-025-02945-4
23.
Browne JE . A review of Doppler ultrasound quality assurance protocols and test devices. Phys Med. (2014) 30(7):742–51. 10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.08.003
24.
Oglat AA Matjafri MZ Suardi N Oqlat MA Abdelrahman MA Oqlat AA . A review of medical Doppler ultrasonography of blood flow in general and especially in common carotid artery. J Med Ultrasound. (2018) 26(1):3–13. 10.4103/JMU.JMU_11_17
25.
Chis BA . Doppler Ultrasound in the era of angiography. Med Ultrason. (2024) 26(4):337–8. 10.11152/mu-4463
26.
Sevco TJ Patel MK Deurdulian C . Carotid ultrasound. Radiol Clin North Am. (2025) 63(1):137–52. 10.1016/j.rcl.2024.07.011
27.
Catalano O Masciotra AP . Update on newer ultrasound systems to study the microvasculature. Radiol Med. (2025) 130(8):1283–96. 10.1007/s11547-025-02035-6
28.
Dias SVM Flumignan RLG Carvas N Iared W . Accuracy of duplex ultrasound in peripheral artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Vasc Bras. (2025) 24:e20240033. 10.1590/1677-5449.202400332
29.
Tafti D Singh V Cheung ME Firstenberg MS . Duplex ultrasound. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing LLC. (2025).
30.
Evans DH Jensen JA Nielsen MB . Ultrasonic colour Doppler imaging. Interface Focus. (2011) 1(4):490–502. 10.1098/rsfs.2011.0017
31.
Zambetti BR Kankaria A Fang F Kim N Nagarsheth K Sarkar R . Diameter and depth of femoral vessels by duplex ultrasound. J Vasc Access. (2025) 26(1):162–7. 10.1177/11297298231200036
32.
Geraci G Sorce A Zanoli L Calabrese V Cuttone G Mattina A et al Renal resistive index and 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease predicted by Framingham risk score and pooled cohort equations: an observational study in hypertensive individuals without cardiovascular disease. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev. (2025) 32(3):311–22. 10.1007/s40292-025-00714-z
33.
Senior R Becher H Monaghan M Agati L Zamorano J Vanoverschelde JL et al Contrast echocardiography: evidence-based recommendations by European association of echocardiography. Eur J Echocardiogr. (2009) 10(2):194–212. 10.1093/ejechocard/jep005
34.
Albulushi A Xie F Porter TR . Ultrasound enhancing agents in cardiovascular imaging: expanding horizons beyond coronary arteries. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. (2024) 22(1):10. 10.1186/s12947-024-00330-2
35.
Yang Y Liu F Yan J Luo Y Huang Q Qiao L . Current status and advances in ultrasound evaluation of neovascularization within carotid artery plaques: a systematic review. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. (2025) 23(1):19. 10.1186/s12947-025-00356-0
36.
Gunabushanam G Robbin ML Scoutt LM . Ultrasound evaluation of the abdominal aorta and mesenteric arteries. Radiol Clin North Am. (2025) 63(1):123–35. 10.1016/j.rcl.2024.07.009
37.
Oglat AA Abukhalil T . Ultrasound elastography: methods, clinical applications, and limitations: a review article. Appl Sci. (2024) 14(10):4308. 10.3390/app14104308
38.
Caenen A Bézy S Pernot M Nightingale KR Vos HJ Voigt JU et al Ultrasound shear wave elastography in cardiology. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. (2024) 17(3):314–29. 10.1016/j.jcmg.2023.12.007
39.
Golemati S Cokkinos DD . Recent advances in vascular ultrasound imaging technology and their clinical implications. Ultrasonics. (2022) 119:106599. 10.1016/j.ultras.2021.106599
40.
Saugel B Kouz K Scheeren TWL Greiwe G Hoppe P Romagnoli S et al Cardiac output estimation using pulse wave analysis-physiology, algorithms, and technologies: a narrative review. Br J Anaesth. (2021) 126(1):67–76. 10.1016/j.bja.2020.09.049
41.
Yin LX Ma CY Wang S Wang YH Meng PP Pan XF et al Reference values of carotid ultrafast pulse-wave velocity: a prospective, multicenter, population-based study. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. (2021) 34(6):629–41. 10.1016/j.echo.2021.01.003
42.
Pan FS Yu L Luo J Wu RD Xu M Liang JY et al Carotid artery stiffness assessment by ultrafast ultrasound imaging: feasibility and potential influencing factors. J Ultrasound Med. (2018) 37(12):2759–67. 10.1002/jum.14630
43.
Liu G Sha W Wu Y Luo J Cai Y Zhang T et al The association between estimated pulse wave velocity and cardio-cerebrovascular disease risk: a cohort study. Eur J Med Res. (2025) 30(1):16. 10.1186/s40001-024-02217-4
44.
Liu K Lin Z Chen Y Hong H . Elevated pulse wave velocity as a marker of arterial stiffness and its association with mortality in US adults. Sci Rep. (2025) 15(1):23026. 10.1038/s41598-025-07198-w
45.
Sequí-Domínguez I Cavero-Redondo I Álvarez-Bueno C Pozuelo-Carrascosa DP Nuñez de Arenas-Arroyo S Martínez-Vizcaíno V . Accuracy of pulse wave velocity predicting cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Med. (2020) 9(7):2080. 10.3390/jcm9072080
46.
Lever-Megina CG Cavero-Redondo I Álvarez-Bueno C Morales-Berenkova C Cabeza-Arrebola G Saz-Lara A . Accuracy of pulse wave velocity for screening coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diagnosis (Berl). (2025) 12(3):287–94. 10.1515/dx-2024-0193
47.
Marais L Pernot M Khettab H Tanter M Messas E Zidi M et al Arterial stiffness assessment by shear wave elastography and ultrafast pulse wave imaging: comparison with reference techniques in normotensives and hypertensives. Ultrasound Med Biol. (2019) 45(3):758–72. 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2018.10.032
48.
Messas E Pernot M Couade M . Arterial wall elasticity: state of the art and future prospects. Diagn Interv Imaging. (2013) 94(5):561–9. 10.1016/j.diii.2013.01.025
49.
Saleem T Raju S . Comparison of intravascular ultrasound and multidimensional contrast imaging modalities for characterization of chronic occlusive iliofemoral venous disease: a systematic review. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. (2021) 9(6):1545–56.e2. 10.1016/j.jvsv.2021.03.022
50.
Cismaru G Serban T Tirpe A . Ultrasound methods in the evaluation of atherosclerosis: from pathophysiology to clinic. Biomedicines. (2021) 9(4):418. 10.3390/biomedicines9040418
51.
Mintz GS Matsumura M Ali Z Maehara A . Clinical utility of intravascular imaging: past, present, and future. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. (2022) 15(10):1799–820. 10.1016/j.jcmg.2022.04.026
52.
Lorenz MW Markus HS Bots ML Rosvall M Sitzer M . Prediction of clinical cardiovascular events with carotid intima-media thickness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Circulation. (2007) 115(4):459–67. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.628875
53.
Grønholdt ML . Ultrasound and lipoproteins as predictors of lipid-rich, rupture-prone plaques in the carotid artery. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. (1999) 19(1):2–13. 10.1161/01.ATV.19.1.2
54.
Kaspar M Baumgartner I Staub D Drexel H Thalhammer C . Non-invasive ultrasound-based imaging of atherosclerosis. Vasa. (2019) 48(2):126–33. 10.1024/0301-1526/a000747
55.
Chambless LE Heiss G Folsom AR Rosamond W Szklo M Sharrett AR et al Association of coronary heart disease incidence with carotid arterial wall thickness and major risk factors: the atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC) study, 1987–1993. Am J Epidemiol. (1997) 146(6):483–94. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009302
56.
Huang R Abdelmoneim SS Ball CA Nhola LF Farrell AM Feinstein S et al Detection of carotid atherosclerotic plaque neovascularization using contrast enhanced ultrasound: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. (2016) 29(6):491–502. 10.1016/j.echo.2016.02.012
57.
Rafailidis V Li X Sidhu PS Partovi S Staub D . Contrast imaging ultrasound for the detection and characterization of carotid vulnerable plaque. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. (2020) 10(4):965–81. 10.21037/cdt.2020.01.08
58.
Rafailidis V Chryssogonidis I Tegos T Kouskouras K Charitanti-Kouridou A . Imaging of the ulcerated carotid atherosclerotic plaque: a review of the literature. Insights Imaging. (2017) 8(2):213–25. 10.1007/s13244-017-0543-8
59.
Lederle FA Johnson GR Wilson SE Chute EP Hye RJ Makaroun MS et al The aneurysm detection and management study screening program: validation cohort and final results. Arch Intern Med. (2000) 160(10):1425–30. 10.1001/archinte.160.10.1425
60.
Owens DK Davidson KW Krist AH Barry MJ Cabana M Caughey AB et al Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm: uS preventive services task force recommendation statement. J Am Med Assoc. (2019) 322(22):2211–8. 10.1001/jama.2019.18928
61.
Chaer RA Gushchin A Rhee R Marone L Cho JS Leers S et al Duplex ultrasound as the sole long-term surveillance method post-endovascular aneurysm repair: a safe alternative for stable aneurysms. J Vasc Surg. (2009) 49(4):845–9. 10.1016/j.jvs.2008.10.073
62.
Hirsch AT Haskal ZJ Hertzer NR Bakal CW Creager MA Halperin JL et al ACC/AHA 2005 practice guidelines for the management of patients with peripheral arterial disease (lower extremity, renal, mesenteric, and abdominal aortic): a collaborative report from the American association for vascular surgery/society for vascular surgery, society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions, society for vascular medicine and biology, society of interventional radiology, and the ACC/AHA task force on practice guidelines (writing committee to develop guidelines for the management of patients with peripheral arterial disease): endorsed by the American association of cardiovascular and pulmonary rehabilitation; national heart, lung, and blood institute; society for vascular nursing; TransAtlantic inter-society consensus; and vascular disease foundation. Circulation. (2006) 113(11):e463–654. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.174526
63.
Maresca D Correia M Villemain O Bizé A Sambin L Tanter M et al Noninvasive imaging of the coronary vasculature using ultrafast ultrasound. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. (2018) 11(6):798–808. 10.1016/j.jcmg.2017.05.021
64.
Gvinianidze L Toulemonde M Hampson R Huang B Bioh G Wakefield LA et al Ultrafast myocardial contrast echocardiography for the assessment of coronary artery disease: first in-human study. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. (2024) 17(10):e017267. 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.124.017267
65.
Krzanowski M Bodzoń W Dimitrow PP . Imaging of all three coronary arteries by transthoracic echocardiography. An illustrated guide. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. (2003) 1:16. 10.1186/1476-7120-1-16
66.
Vegsundvåg J Holte E Wiseth R Hegbom K Hole T . Transthoracic echocardiography for imaging of the different coronary artery segments: a feasibility study. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. (2009) 7(1):58. 10.1186/1476-7120-7-58
67.
Rigo F Murer B Ossena G Favaretto E . Transthoracic echocardiographic imaging of coronary arteries: tips, traps, and pitfalls. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. (2008) 6:7. 10.1186/1476-7120-6-7
68.
Purkayastha S Sorond F . Transcranial Doppler ultrasound: technique and application. Semin Neurol. (2012) 32(4):411–20. 10.1055/s-0032-1331812
69.
Willie CK Colino FL Bailey DM Tzeng YC Binsted G Jones LW et al Utility of transcranial Doppler ultrasound for the integrative assessment of cerebrovascular function. J Neurosci Methods. (2011) 196(2):221–37. 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2011.01.011
70.
Ren J Li J Chen S Liu Y Ta D . Unveiling the potential of ultrasound in brain imaging: innovations, challenges, and prospects. Ultrasonics. (2025) 145:107465. 10.1016/j.ultras.2024.107465
71.
Soares GM Murphy TP Singha MS Parada A Jaff M . Renal artery duplex ultrasonography as a screening and surveillance tool to detect renal artery stenosis: a comparison with current reference standard imaging. J Ultrasound Med. (2006) 25(3):293–8. 10.7863/jum.2006.25.3.293
72.
Ciccone MM Cortese F Fiorella A Scicchitano P Cito F Quistelli G et al The clinical role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the evaluation of renal artery stenosis and diagnostic superiority as compared to traditional echo-color-Doppler flow imaging. Int Angiol. (2011) 30(2):135–9.
73.
Bots ML Evans GW Riley WA Grobbee DE . Carotid intima-media thickness measurements in intervention studies: design options, progression rates, and sample size considerations: a point of view. Stroke. (2003) 34(12):2985–94. 10.1161/01.STR.0000102044.27905.B5
74.
Yasmin F Shah SMI Naeem A Shujauddin SM Jabeen A Kazmi S et al Artificial intelligence in the diagnosis and detection of heart failure: the past, present, and future. Rev Cardiovasc Med. (2021) 22(4):1095–113. 10.31083/j.rcm2204121
75.
Kodera S Akazawa H Morita H Komuro I . Prospects for cardiovascular medicine using artificial intelligence. J Cardiol. (2022) 79(3):319–25. 10.1016/j.jjcc.2021.10.016
76.
Nabi W Bansal A Xu B . Applications of artificial intelligence and machine learning approaches in echocardiography. Echocardiography. (2021) 38(6):982–92. 10.1111/echo.15048
77.
Zhou J Du M Chang S Chen Z . Artificial intelligence in echocardiography: detection, functional evaluation, and disease diagnosis. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. (2021) 19(1):29. 10.1186/s12947-021-00261-2
78.
Kusunose K . Revolution of echocardiographic reporting: the new era of artificial intelligence and natural language processing. J Echocardiogr. (2023) 21(3):99–104. 10.1007/s12574-023-00611-1
79.
Sakamoto A Kaneko T Sato E Fujita W Nakamura Y Yokotsuka N et al Artificial intelligence in echocardiography: current applications and future perspectives. J Echocardiogr. (2025) 23(4):231–40. 10.1007/s12574-025-00703-0
80.
Kagiyama N Tokodi M Sengupta PP . Machine learning in cardiovascular imaging. Heart Fail Clin. (2022) 18(2):245–58. 10.1016/j.hfc.2021.11.003
81.
Kusunose K . Transforming echocardiography: the role of artificial intelligence in enhancing diagnostic accuracy and accessibility. Intern Med. (2025) 64(3):331–6. 10.2169/internalmedicine.4171-24
82.
Sahashi Y Ouyang D Okura H Kagiyama N . AI-echocardiography: current status and future direction. J Cardiol. (2025) 85(6):458–64. 10.1016/j.jjcc.2025.02.005
83.
Soori M Arezoo B Dastres R . Artificial intelligence, machine learning and deep learning in advanced robotics, a review. Cogn Robot. (2023) 3:54–70. 10.1016/j.cogr.2023.04.001
84.
Dell'Angela L Nicolosi GL . Artificial intelligence applied to cardiovascular imaging, a critical focus on echocardiography: the point-of-view from “the other side of the coin”. J Clin Ultrasound. (2022) 50(6):772–80. 10.1002/jcu.23215
85.
Fortuni F Ciliberti G De Chiara B Conte E Franchin L Musella F et al Advancements and applications of artificial intelligence in cardiovascular imaging: a comprehensive review. Eur Heart J Imaging Methods Pract. (2024) 2(4):qyae136. 10.1093/ehjimp/qyae136
86.
Niazai A Jamil H Hameed M Sheikh S Nisar MR . Artificial intelligence in cardiovascular diagnostics: a systematic review and descriptive analysis of clinical applications and diagnostic performance. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. (2025) 25(1):849. 10.1186/s12872-025-05327-x
87.
Sachdeva R Armstrong AK Arnaout R Grosse-Wortmann L Han BK Mertens L et al Novel techniques in imaging congenital heart disease: JACC scientific statement. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2024) 83(1):63–81. 10.1016/j.jacc.2023.10.025
88.
East SA Wang Y Yanamala N Maganti K Sengupta PP . Artificial intelligence-enabled point-of-care echocardiography: bringing precision imaging to the bedside. Curr Atheroscler Rep. (2025) 27(1):70. 10.1007/s11883-025-01316-9
89.
Kordzadeh A Askari A Abbassi OA Sanoudos N Mohaghegh V Shirvani H . Artificial intelligence and duplex ultrasound for detection of carotid artery disease. Vascular. (2023) 31(6):1187–93. 10.1177/17085381221107465
90.
Ricco JB Hostalrich A Chaufour X . Aorta unveiled: the crucial role of imaging in diagnosing and managing aortic disease-a review. Eur Heart J Imaging Methods Pract. (2025) 3(2):qyaf108. 10.1093/ehjimp/qyaf108
91.
Njei B Al-Ajlouni YA Lemos SY Ugwendum D Njei N Al Ta'ani O et al AI-based models for risk prediction in MASLD: a systematic review. Dig Dis Sci. (2025). 10.1007/s10620-025-09499-6
92.
Ben-Pazi H Jhashan S Salame H Cohen H Matot I Pazi MB et al Rediscovering the carotid pulse: unlocking hidden insights in the era of AI-driven healthcare. Front Neurol. (2025) 16:1608651. 10.3389/fneur.2025.1608651
93.
Labaf A Åhman-Persson L Husu LS Smith JG Ingvarsson A Evaldsson AW . Performance of a point-of-care ultrasound platform for artificial intelligence-enabled assessment of pulmonary B-lines. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. (2025) 23(1):3. 10.1186/s12947-025-00338-2
94.
Mo Y Huang H Liang B Ma W . Advancements in Artificial Intelligence Applications for Cardiovascular Disease Research. arXiv preprint arXiv:250603698. (2025).
95.
Yan L Li Q Fu K Zhou X Zhang K . Progress in the application of artificial intelligence in ultrasound-assisted medical diagnosis. Bioengineering (Basel). (2025) 12(3):288. 10.3390/bioengineering12030288
96.
Zhang J Gajjala S Agrawal P Tison GH Hallock LA Beussink-Nelson L et al Fully automated echocardiogram interpretation in clinical practice. Circulation. (2018) 138(16):1623–35. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.034338
97.
Narang A Bae R Hong H Thomas Y Surette S Cadieu C et al Utility of a deep-learning algorithm to guide novices to acquire echocardiograms for limited diagnostic use. JAMA Cardiol. (2021) 6(6):624–32. 10.1001/jamacardio.2021.0185
98.
Saba L Sanagala SS Gupta SK Koppula VK Johri AM Khanna NN et al Multimodality carotid plaque tissue characterization and classification in the artificial intelligence paradigm: a narrative review for stroke application. Ann Transl Med. (2021) 9(14):1206. 10.21037/atm-20-7676
99.
Gupta A Baradaran H Schweitzer AD Kamel H Pandya A Delgado D et al Carotid plaque MRI and stroke risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke. (2013) 44(11):3071–7. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.002551
100.
Voigt JU Cvijic M . 2- And 3-dimensional myocardial strain in cardiac health and disease. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. (2019) 12(9):1849–63. 10.1016/j.jcmg.2019.01.044
101.
Ouyang D He B Ghorbani A Yuan N Ebinger J Langlotz CP et al Video-based AI for beat-to-beat assessment of cardiac function. Nature. (2020) 580(7802):252–6. 10.1038/s41586-020-2145-8
102.
Chen H Zeng Y Cai D . Deep learning for cardiovascular management: optimizing pathways and cost control under diagnosis-related group models. Front Artif Intell. (2025) 8:1580445. 10.3389/frai.2025.1580445
103.
Saba L Anzidei M Marincola BC Piga M Raz E Bassareo PP et al Imaging of the carotid artery vulnerable plaque. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. (2014) 37(3):572–85. 10.1007/s00270-013-0711-2
104.
Griffin WF Choi AD Riess JS Marques H Chang HJ Choi JH et al AI evaluation of stenosis on coronary CTA, comparison with quantitative coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve: a CREDENCE trial substudy. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. (2023) 16(2):193–205. 10.1016/j.jcmg.2021.10.020
105.
Song J Zou L Li Y Wang X Qiu J Gong K . Combining artificial intelligence assisted image segmentation and ultrasound based radiomics for the prediction of carotid plaque stability. BMC Med Imaging. (2025) 25(1):89. 10.1186/s12880-025-01621-4
106.
Biswas M Saba L Omerzu T Johri AM Khanna NN Viskovic K et al A review on joint carotid intima-media thickness and plaque area measurement in ultrasound for cardiovascular/stroke risk monitoring: artificial intelligence framework. J Digit Imaging. (2021) 34(3):581–604. 10.1007/s10278-021-00461-2
107.
Tiwari E Shrimankar D Maindarkar M Bhagawati M Kaur J Singh IM et al Artificial intelligence-based cardiovascular/stroke risk stratification in women affected by autoimmune disorders: a narrative survey. Rheumatol Int. (2025) 45(1):14. 10.1007/s00296-024-05756-5
108.
Föllmer B Williams MC Dey D Arbab-Zadeh A Maurovich-Horvat P Volleberg R et al Roadmap on the use of artificial intelligence for imaging of vulnerable atherosclerotic plaque in coronary arteries. Nat Rev Cardiol. (2024) 21(1):51–64. 10.1038/s41569-023-00900-3
109.
Feinstein SB . Contrast ultrasound imaging of the carotid artery vasa vasorum and atherosclerotic plaque neovascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2006) 48(2):236–43. 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.02.068
110.
Coli S Magnoni M Sangiorgi G Marrocco-Trischitta MM Melisurgo G Mauriello A et al Contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging of intraplaque neovascularization in carotid arteries: correlation with histology and plaque echogenicity. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2008) 52(3):223–30. 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.02.082
111.
MacKinnon GE Brittain EL . Mobile health technologies in cardiopulmonary disease. Chest. (2020) 157(3):654–64. 10.1016/j.chest.2019.10.015
112.
Kimura BJ . Point-of-care cardiac ultrasound techniques in the physical examination: better at the bedside. Heart (British Cardiac Society). (2017) 103(13):987–94. 10.1136/heartjnl-2016-309915
113.
Johri AM Durbin J Newbigging J Tanzola R Chow R De S et al Cardiac point-of-care ultrasound: state-of-the-art in medical school education. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. (2018) 31(7):749–60. 10.1016/j.echo.2018.01.014
114.
Andersen GN Haugen BO Graven T Salvesen O Mjølstad OC Dalen H . Feasibility and reliability of point-of-care pocket-sized echocardiography. Eur J Echocardiogr. (2011) 12(9):665–70. 10.1093/ejechocard/jer108
115.
Becker C Fusaro M Patel D Shalom I Frishman WH Scurlock C . The utility of teleultrasound to guide acute patient management. Cardiol Rev. (2017) 25(3):97–101. 10.1097/CRD.0000000000000144
116.
Otto CM . Heartbeat: telemedicine for echocardiography screening. Heart (British Cardiac Society). (2019) 105(4):261–3. 10.1136/heartjnl-2019-315902
117.
Topol EJ . High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. (2019) 25(1):44–56. 10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7
118.
Amin MA . Ultrasound evaluation of extra cranial carotid arteries and its correlation with different risk factors of atherosclerosis. Benha J Appl Sci. (2024) 9(8):51–7. 10.21608/bjas.2024.312224.1473
119.
Ottakath N Al-Maadeed S Zughaier SM Elharrouss O Mohammed HH Chowdhury MEH et al Ultrasound-based image analysis for predicting carotid artery stenosis risk: a comprehensive review of the problem, techniques, datasets, and future directions. Diagnostics (Basel). (2023) 13(15):2614. 10.3390/diagnostics13152614
120.
Kariman SS van den Heuvel JFM Adriaanse BME Oepkes D Bekker MN . The potential of tele-ultrasound, handheld and self-operated ultrasound in pregnancy care: a systematic review. Prenat Diagn. (2025) 45(7):906–20. 10.1002/pd.6679
121.
Touboul PJ Hennerici MG Meairs S Adams H Amarenco P Bornstein N et al Mannheim carotid intima-media thickness consensus (2004–2006). an update on behalf of the advisory board of the 3rd and 4th watching the risk symposium, 13th and 15th European stroke conferences, Mannheim, Germany, 2004, and Brussels, Belgium, 2006. Cerebrovasc Dis. (2007) 23(1):75–80. 10.1159/000097034
122.
Wasniewski S Kfouri Da Silva R Capdeville S Rivera Molina I Virosta E Ortiz Cortés C et al Women’s health: an imaging-based cardiovascular risk-reduction program (WAKE UP) study. Rationale and design. Front Cardiovasc Med. (2025) 12:1535827. 10.3389/fcvm.2025.1535827
123.
Mitchell AR Hurry R Le Page P MacLachlan H . Pre-participation cardiovascular screening: is community screening using hand-held cardiac ultrasound feasible?Echo Res Pract. (2015) 2(2):49–55. 10.1530/ERP-15-0010
124.
Hatab MR Giller CA Clarke GD . Evaluation of cerebral arterial flow with transcranial Doppler ultrasound: theoretical development and phantom studies. Ultrasound Med Biol. (1997) 23(7):1025–31. 10.1016/S0301-5629(97)00030-6
125.
Radermacher J Chavan A Bleck J Vitzthum A Stoess B Gebel MJ et al Use of Doppler ultrasonography to predict the outcome of therapy for renal-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med. (2001) 344(6):410–7. 10.1056/NEJM200102083440603
126.
Kupinski AM . Mesenteric and renal arterial duplex ultrasound: a review. Vascular Medicine. (2023) 28(5):463–75. 10.1177/1358863X231172247
127.
MacLeod JR Kivell MJ Shivgulam ME Liu H O’Brien MW . Accuracy of Duplex ultrasound for detecting renal artery stenosis: a systematic review. Journal for Vascular Ultrasound. (2024) 48(1):15–27. 10.1177/15443167231223551
128.
Granata A Fiorini F Andrulli S Logias F Gallieni M Romano G et al Doppler Ultrasound and renal artery stenosis: an overview. J Ultrasound. (2009) 12(4):133–43. 10.1016/j.jus.2009.09.006
129.
Zwolak RM Fillinger MF Walsh DB LaBombard FE Musson A Darling CE et al Mesenteric and celiac duplex scanning: a validation study. J Vasc Surg. (1998) 27(6):1078–87. 10.1016/S0741-5214(98)60010-0
130.
AbuRahma AF Scott Dean L . Duplex ultrasound interpretation criteria for inferior mesenteric arteries. Vascular. (2012) 20(3):145–9. 10.1258/vasc.2011.oa0349
131.
Collins R Burch J Cranny G Aguiar-Ibáñez R Craig D Wright K et al Duplex ultrasonography, magnetic resonance angiography, and computed tomography angiography for diagnosis and assessment of symptomatic, lower limb peripheral arterial disease: systematic review. BMJ (Clinical Research ed). (2007) 334(7606):1257. 10.1136/bmj.39217.473275.55
Summary
Keywords
atherosclerosis, cardiovascular ultrasound, carotid intima-media thickness, contrast-enhanced ultrasound, coronary artery disease, intravascular ultrasound, preventive cardiology, vascular imaging
Citation
Chaiter Y, Fink DL and Machluf Y (2026) Ultrasound in cardiovascular care: a perspective on preventive, diagnostic, and monitoring applications. Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 13:1721700. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2026.1721700
Received
09 October 2025
Revised
22 January 2026
Accepted
28 January 2026
Published
18 February 2026
Volume
13 - 2026
Edited by
Damiano D'Ardes, University of Studies G. d'Annunzio Chieti and Pescara, Italy
Reviewed by
Pankaj Kumar Jain, Washington University in St. Louis, United States
Jon Zubiaur, HM Hospitales, Spain
Updates
Copyright
© 2026 Chaiter, Fink and Machluf.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Yoram Chaiter chaiter@bezeqint.net
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.