Diagnostics & imaging AI · Ultrasound AI CDS
Koios Medical
Koios Medical provides FDA-cleared AI clinical decision support for breast and thyroid ultrasound (Smart Ultrasound / Koios DS). It is not a CT triage platform, MRI acceleration tool, or ambient documentation product.
Strong fit
- Breast and thyroid ultrasound programs that want FDA-cleared AI clinical decision support as a second reader
- Sites that will measure biopsy yield and reader agreement after Koios DS goes live
- Buyers comparing ultrasound AI CDS rather than CT triage or MRI acceleration
Weak fit
- Radiology groups shopping enterprise CT/MR triage as the primary buy
- Programs without ultrasound volume in cleared indications
- Buyers who need ambient documentation or PACS replacement
Bottom line
Koios Medical earns a Conditional for ultrasound programs that specifically need FDA-cleared AI decision support for breast and thyroid imaging. The clinical niche is real; commercial scale and revenue transparency are still limited across public directories, which caps the score. Outcomes depend on reader workflow fit and whether the second-opinion output changes biopsy decisions. Product depth is ultrasound CDS - different from Riverain chest CT/XR, Subtle acceleration, and Aidoc triage. Implementation is an ultrasound and reporting workflow project. Pricing is custom. Treat LinkedIn-class ~$4M revenue figures as estimates, not audited financials. Score sits at the low end of our diagnostics board for narrow ultrasound AI.
Score breakdown
Weights: Outcomes 35% · Product 30% · Implementation 20% · Pricing clarity 15%.
Koios Medical provides FDA-cleared Smart Ultrasound AI clinical decision support for breast and thyroid ultrasound analysis, aimed at improving diagnostic consistency and efficiency.
Compare AISAP when the ultrasound job is cardiac POCUS, Riverain for chest CT/X-ray detection, and Aidoc when enterprise CT triage is the primary shopping list.
Conditional reflects a real niche with limited commercial-scale proof on our diagnostics board.
Competitor landscape
| Vendor | Overall | Ease of implementation |
|---|---|---|
| Koios Medical | 6.7 | 6.3 |
| AISAP | 7.0 | 6.6 |
| DeepTek | 7.1 | 6.8 |
| Riverain Technologies | 7.3 | 6.9 |
| Subtle Medical | 7.2 | 6.8 |
| Avicenna.AI | 6.9 | 6.6 |
| Studycast | 7.2 | 6.9 |
| Aidoc | 7.9 | 7.5 |
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | Software licensing for FDA-cleared ultrasound AI CDS; site and volume based. |
| What usually drives cost | Sites, exam volume, breast vs thyroid modules, and integration path. |
| What to ask in diligence | Cost per site at your ultrasound volume, indication coverage, and reporting-system integration scope. |
| Published pricing | Public list price: not published. Expect a clinical ultrasound AI quote. |
Public revenue figures conflict across directories; diligence required on commercial scale.
Prerequisites for purchase
| Need | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| What you need to get Koios Medical to function | |
| Radiology clinical owner plus imaging IT | AI tools fail without both. |
| PACS/RIS/EMR interface path documented | Orphan results queues create safety risk. |
| Agreement on which exam types are in scope | Boiling the ocean delays value. |
| Alert or enhanced-series review staffing plan | Unowned queues become ignored queues. |
| Change control for clinical downtime windows | Surprise viewers during peak lists destroy trust. |
| What will maximize your value | |
| Measure turnaround, reopen rates, or detection metrics named at kickoff | Demo accuracy is not operations. |
| Start with one high-volume exam family | Narrow wins beat empty enterprise banners. |
| Review false positives weekly with radiologists | Noisy tools get turned off. |
| Keep radiologists in native viewers when possible | Extra worklists kill adoption. |
| Document FDA indication coverage vs your protocol mix | Mismatched clearances waste spend. |
| Deal-breakers | |
| No imaging IT or clinical owner. | |
| You refuse any interface work. | |
| You expect ambient scribe outcomes from imaging AI. | |
| Nobody will review alerts or enhanced series. | |
| Legal blocks cloud or vendor PHI paths you require. | |
Value creation time frame
| # | Stage | Typical range |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Scope | 2–4 weeks — Exam list, interfaces, success metrics. |
| 2 | Integrate | 4–12 weeks — PACS/RIS/EMR hooks; validation cases. |
| 3 | Pilot | 4–8 weeks — One site or modality family. |
| 4 | Expand | Ongoing — More sites; tuning. |
Methodology
| Weight | Factor | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| 35% | Customer outcomes | Whether buyers get measurable operational or clinical-workflow results after go-live |
| 30% | Product | Capability depth, reliability, and fit for the job the category actually buys |
| 20% | Implementation | How hard it is to stand up, integrate, train, and stabilize |
| 15% | Pricing clarity | Whether a buyer can model total cost without a mystery quote |
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Highly recommend | Strong outcomes and product with manageable caveats |
| Recommend | Solid fit for the right buyer; know the tradeoffs |
| Conditional | Only with a specific use case or heavy caveats |
| Not recommended | Avoid for most buyers in this category |
Read our full methodology for how we weight scores and assign recommend labels.