RESUMEN
The application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) facilitates medical activities by automating routine tasks for healthcare professionals. AI augments but does not replace human decision-making, thus complicating the process of addressing legal responsibility. This study investigates the legal challenges associated with the medical use of AI in radiology, analyzing relevant case law and literature, with a specific focus on professional liability attribution. In the case of an error, the primary responsibility remains with the physician, with possible shared liability with developers according to the framework of medical device liability. If there is disagreement with the AI's findings, the physician must not only pursue but also justify their choices according to prevailing professional standards. Regulations must balance the autonomy of AI systems with the need for responsible clinical practice. Effective use of AI-generated evaluations requires knowledge of data dynamics and metrics like sensitivity and specificity, even without a clear understanding of the underlying algorithms: the opacity (referred to as the "black box phenomenon") of certain systems raises concerns about the interpretation and actual usability of results for both physicians and patients. AI is redefining healthcare, underscoring the imperative for robust liability frameworks, meticulous updates of systems, and transparent patient communication regarding AI involvement.
RESUMEN
In patients with total hip arthroplasty (THA) with recurrent pain, symptoms may be caused by several conditions involving not just the joint, but also the surrounding soft tissues including tendons, muscles, bursae, and peripheral nerves. US and US-guided interventional procedures are important tools in the diagnostic work-up of patients with painful THA given that it is possible to reach a prompt diagnosis both directly identifying the pathological changes of periprosthetic structures and indirectly evaluating the response and pain relief to local injection of anesthetics under US monitoring. Then, US guidance can be used for the aspiration of fluid from the joint or periarticular collections, or alternatively to follow the biopsy needle to collect samples for culture analysis in the suspicion of prosthetic joint infection. Furthermore, US-guided percutaneous interventions may be used to treat several conditions with well-established minimally invasive procedures that involve injections of corticosteroid, local anesthetics, and platelet-rich plasma or other autologous products. In this review, we will discuss the clinical and technical applications of US-guided percutaneous interventional procedures in painful THA that can be used in routine daily practice for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes.