AIRS Medical vs Subtle Medical
Both enhance and accelerate image acquisition rather than detecting pathology, both are FDA cleared and vendor neutral, both grade A on AI centrality, and they overlap directly on MRI, so the split is modality breadth against MRI depth. If you need multi modality coverage including PET, or you weight peer reviewed validation, start with Subtle Medical, which spans PET and MRI with a CT product pending and grades A on clinical evidence. If your fleet is MRI and you want a tool cleared to stack on top of your scanner makers' own deep learning reconstruction, start with AIRS Medical, which uniquely holds that clearance. Both run on existing hardware with no new capital equipment.
- MRI depth with a rare stacked reconstruction clearance: an April 2026 FDA clearance lets SwiftMR run alongside the scanner manufacturers' own deep learning reconstruction rather than forcing a choice between them, which few competitors address.
- Broad within MRI: cleared across all pulse sequences and all body parts, wider than the organ by organ clearances most imaging AI carries, and vendor neutral across manufacturers and field strengths.
- A large operational footprint: more than 1,700 imaging centers and hospitals across more than 40 countries, with named sites reporting brain scans falling from 15 to 9 minutes.
- Multi modality coverage: PET and MRI today with a CT product pending, against AIRS's MRI only scope, and its newest PET model supports all FDA approved radiotracers at up to 75 percent faster acquisition.
- The deeper evidence and clearance record: 11 FDA clearances reported per product with dates, and more than 25 peer reviewed publications including validation of its newest PET model across accelerated low count acquisitions.
- Deployment on existing hardware with no new capital equipment, scanner and vendor agnostic across more than 1,300 scanners at named systems including Mount Sinai and RadNet.
Side-by-Side
| Axis | A AIRS Medical |
S Subtle Medical |
|---|---|---|
| AI Centrality | ||
| Autonomy and Oversight Model | — | |
| Model and Technology Transparency | — | |
| Clinical and Operational Evidence | ||
| AI Safety and PHI Stewardship | — | |
| HIPAA and BAA Posture | — | |
| Security Certifications and Trust Center | — | |
| FDA and Regulatory Status | ||
| AI Governance and Bias Disclosure | — | |
| EHR and Interoperability Depth | — | |
| Deployment Model and Data Residency | ||
| Commercial Transparency | ||
| Setting and Specialty Coverage | — |
Both enhance or accelerate acquisition rather than detecting pathology, which places the safety question in an unusual spot: these models alter the image the diagnosis is made from, so the FDA clearance, not clinician review, is the substantive control that the alteration preserves diagnostic quality. Neither publishes pricing or a security attestation. AIRS's evidence is operational rather than a published reader study confirming diagnostic accuracy is preserved at reduced scan times, which is the clinical question underneath the throughput claim, and it publishes no analysis of whether reconstruction quality varies by body habitus or rare findings. Subtle Medical's record is assessed on a partial set of axes here, so its autonomy, governance, security, and interoperability posture were not evaluated and should be diligence items. AIRS is Seoul based and operates globally, so a US buyer should confirm where inference runs and establish HIPAA terms.