ReviewFrontiers in digital health2026
AI-enabled cardiovascular devices: a lifecycle playbook for evidence, change control, and post-market assurance.
Review in Frontiers in digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Bioengineering of Extracellular Vesicle Platforms in Cardiovascular Medicine.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AI-enabled cardiovascular devices are increasingly used in imaging, physiological signal analysis, and clinical decision support systems. Despite growing clinical adoption, requirements for evidence generation, software change management, and post-deployment assurance remain fragmented across jurisdictions and are often difficult to translate into operational processes within healthcare organizations. This review synthesizes common foundations of software as a medical device (SaMD) oversight and compares key regulatory expectations regarding cardiovascular AI across the United States, the European Union, and the United Kingdom, with emphasis on the entire clinical lifecycle from pre-deployment assessment to post-market monitoring. Across jurisdictions, convergent operational requirements emerge: First, external validation reflecting real-world heterogeneity with assessment beyond discrimination, including calibration and clinically relevant threshold performance. Second, structured governance of software updates with predefined limits and verification/validation activities. Third, transparency and traceability documentation supporting safe use, accountability, and auditability. Finally, continuous post-market surveillance with longitudinal performance monitoring across clinically relevant subgroups. These requirements are translated into a set of practical implementation artifacts, including a transparency document template, a site acceptance testing protocol, a governance workbook aligned with predefined change planning concepts, a monitoring dashboard specification linking key performance indicators to predefined actions, and an accountability framework outlining organizational responsibilities. Representative cardiovascular use cases (CT-based functional assessment, ECG-based screening and triage, and echocardiographic quantification) illustrate how modality-specific sources of variability impact monitoring priorities and governance considerations. This synthesis supports procurement, governance, and quality assurance activities for AI-enabled cardiovascular devices while maintaining alignment with contemporary methodological standards and regulatory expectations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.