시장보고서
상품코드
1926866

진단용 초음파 장치 시장 : 장비 유형별, 기술별, 트랜스듀서 유형별, 주파수별, 용도별, 최종사용자별 - 예측(2026-2032년)

Diagnostic Ultrasound Devices Market by Device Type, Technology, Transducer Type, Frequency, Application, End User - Global Forecast 2026-2032

발행일: | 리서치사: 360iResearch | 페이지 정보: 영문 183 Pages | 배송안내 : 1-2일 (영업일 기준)

    
    
    




■ 보고서에 따라 최신 정보로 업데이트하여 보내드립니다. 배송일정은 문의해 주시기 바랍니다.

진단용 초음파 장치 시장은 2025년에 102억 9,000만 달러로 평가되었습니다. 2026년에는 108억 2,000만 달러로 성장하고, CAGR 5.35%로 성장을 지속하여 2032년까지 148억 2,000만 달러에 이를 것으로 예측됩니다.

주요 시장 통계
기준 연도 : 2025년 102억 9,000만 달러
추정 연도 : 2026년 108억 2,000만 달러
예측 연도 : 2032년 148억 2,000만 달러
CAGR(%) 5.35%

영상 하드웨어, 소프트웨어 인텔리전스, 워크플로우 통합의 혁신이 진단용 초음파 장치의 임상적 가치 제안을 재정의하고 있습니다.

진단용 초음파 장치는 단일 목적의 영상진단 도구에서 진료 현장에서의 선별검사부터 첨단 영상진단실까지 다양한 임상 경로를 지원하는 다기능 플랫폼으로 진화했습니다. 트랜스듀서 설계, 신호 처리, 소프트웨어 기반 이미지 강화 기술의 발전으로 임상적 유용성이 전문 분야를 넘어 확장되는 동시에 휴대성 향상과 워크플로우 통합으로 도입 장벽을 낮출 수 있게 되었습니다. 그 결과, 초음파는 방사선을 사용하지 않고 신속한 의사 결정과 시술 지침을 지원하는 실시간 시각화를 원하는 많은 임상의들에게 초음파가 주요 영상 진단 모달리티로 자리 잡게 되었습니다.

기술, 임상 실습, 비즈니스 모델의 융합은 의료 현장에서 진단용 초음파의 접근, 통합, 수익화 방식을 변화시키고 있습니다.

진단용 초음파의 환경은 여러 상호 작용하는 힘에 의해 혁신적인 변화를 경험하고 있습니다. 첫째, 소형화 및 트랜스듀서 소재의 발전으로 병상이나 지역 의료 현장에 영상 진단을 제공하는 휴대용 및 휴대용 시스템의 보급이 가능해졌습니다. 이러한 기기들은 접근성을 확대하는 동시에, 비영상의학과 임상의들이 즉각적인 임상적 판단의 근거로 현장 진료 초음파에 의존하는 경우가 증가함에 따라 새로운 교육 및 인증 패러다임을 촉진하고 있습니다.

누적된 관세 변동이 진단용 초음파 장치 제조업체 및 공급업체 전반공급망 복원력, 조달 전략 및 구매 의사결정에 미치는 영향 평가

최근 미국이 시행한 관세 정책은 진단용 초음파 장치 생태계의 세계 공급망, 조달 결정 및 비용 구조에 새로운 고려 사항을 가져왔습니다. 관세로 인한 부품 및 완제품의 유통 변화에 따라 제조업체들은 조달 지역의 재평가, BOM 전략의 최적화, 핵심 서브시스템의 현지화를 가속화해야 하는 상황에 직면해 있습니다. 이에 따라 의료 시스템 및 유통업체의 조달 부문은 리드 타임과 공급업체 가용성의 변동성이 증가함에 따라 보다 강력한 공급업체 분산 및 비상 대응 계획이 요구되고 있습니다.

통합 세분화 분석을 통해 장치 아키텍처, 영상 기술, 임상 적용, 트랜스듀서 선택, 사용자 환경, 주파수 옵션이 어떻게 조달 및 활용을 형성하는지 파악할 수 있습니다.

부문 수준의 트렌드 분석을 통해 진단용 초음파 장치의 기술적, 임상적 관점에서의 명확한 도입 패턴과 운영상의 우선순위를 파악할 수 있습니다. 장비 유형별로 보면, 핸드헬드 장비는 진료 현장에서의 즉각적인 접근성과 신속한 배포를 우선시하고, 컴팩트 시스템이나 노트북 시스템을 포함한 휴대용 시스템은 휴대성과 확장된 영상 진단 능력의 균형을 중요시합니다. 카트 기반 및 타워 시스템과 같은 독립형 시스템은 고도의 영상 처리와 확장성이 필수적인 첨단 급성기 의료 및 전문 영상 진단 환경에서 지속적으로 활용되고 있습니다.

의료 제공 모델, 규제 경로, 도입 동향이 진단용 초음파기기 수요 및 상용화 전략에 미치는 지역별 비교 분석

지역별 동향은 전 세계 도입 경로, 규제 대응, 상업 전략에 영향을 미칩니다. 북미와 남미에서는 의료 시스템이 진료 현장에서의 진단 및 통합 진료 경로를 점점 더 중요시하고 있으며, 이는 지역 의료 및 응급 의료를 지원할 수 있는 휴대용 핸드헬드 기기에 대한 수요를 주도하고 있습니다. 이에 따라 임상 교육 프로그램 및 임상 현장의 자격 인증 이니셔티브에 대한 투자가 증가하고 있으며, 초음파 검사의 활용은 기존의 영상 진단 부문을 넘어 확대되고 있습니다.

제품 및 서비스 통합, 임상 파트너십, 소프트웨어 에코시스템이 진단용 초음파 장치에서 차별화와 장기적인 경쟁 우위를 창출하는 구조

진단용 초음파 분야경쟁 구도는 하드웨어 혁신과 종합적인 소프트웨어 서비스 생태계를 결합한 기업에 의해 정의되고 있습니다. 주요 장비 제조업체들은 첨단 트랜스듀서 설계와 AI 기반 이미지 처리 및 워크플로우 자동화를 결합한 통합 이미징 제품군을 통해 차별화를 꾀하고 있습니다. 임상 센터 및 학술 기관과의 전략적 제휴를 통해 임상적 유용성을 더욱 입증하고, 전문 사용자 및 다직종 팀에서의 보급을 가속화하고 있습니다.

제조업체와 공급자가 회복탄력성을 강화하고, 임상 도입을 가속화하며, 제품 개발을 치료 경로와 일치시킬 수 있는 실질적인 전략 과제

업계 리더은 임상적 의미와 상업적 모멘텀을 유지하기 위해 다음과 같은 실행 가능한 노력을 우선순위에 두어야 합니다. 첫째, 기능의 단계적 업그레이드와 전자 건강 기록 및 이미지 아카이브와의 원활한 연계를 가능하게 하는 모듈식 플랫폼 아키텍처에 대한 투자입니다. 이를 통해 공급자의 업그레이드 부담을 줄이고, 하드웨어를 전면 교체하지 않고도 지속적인 기능 개선이 가능합니다. 둘째, 워크플로우 연구와 현장 사용자의 피드백을 제품 로드맵에 반영하여 임상의 중심의 설계를 가속화하고, 교육 부담을 최소화하면서 전문 분야 전반에 걸친 도입을 최적화하는 것입니다.

1차 임상의 인터뷰, 기술 검증, 공급망 매핑, 독립적인 동료 검토를 결합한 조사 방법을 통해 실용적인 진단용 초음파에 대한 인사이트력을 도출합니다.

본 조사에서는 1차 조사와 2차 조사를 통합하여 진단용 초음파 장치 동향에 대한 종합적인 견해를 구축하였습니다. 1차 조사에서는 각 전문 분야의 임상 사용자, 조달 담당자, 영상진단 부서의 기술 책임자를 대상으로 구조화된 인터뷰를 실시하여 운영 우선순위, 도입 촉진요인, 미해결 임상 니즈를 파악했습니다. 2차 조사에서는 심사가 완료된 문헌, 규제 당국에 제출한 서류, 제조업체의 문서, 기술 사양, 규제 동향, 임상 적용을 검토했습니다.

기술 발전과 의료 제공의 변화를 통합하고, 진단용 초음파의 임상적 유용성이 계속 확대되는 가운데 전략적 벤더 파트너십이 필요한 이유를 밝힙니다.

진단용 초음파 장치는 기술적 기회와 진화하는 의료 서비스 요구의 교차점에 위치하고 있습니다. 트랜스듀서 엔지니어링, 알고리즘 해석, 클라우드 지원 워크플로우의 발전이 결합되어 이 양식의 임상 적용 범위를 확장하고, 신속성, 접근성, 시술 지침을 우선시하는 새로운 치료 모델을 실현하고 있습니다. 동시에, 상업적 및 규제적 변화, 특히 공급망 변동성과 상환 패러다임의 변화에 직면하여 이해관계자들은 혁신과 비즈니스 연속성의 균형을 맞추어야 하는 상황에 직면해 있습니다.

자주 묻는 질문

  • 진단용 초음파 장치 시장 규모는 어떻게 예측되나요?
  • 진단용 초음파 장치의 기술 발전은 어떤 변화를 가져오고 있나요?
  • 진단용 초음파 장치의 접근성과 통합은 어떻게 변화하고 있나요?
  • 미국의 관세 정책이 진단용 초음파 장치 시장에 미치는 영향은 무엇인가요?
  • 진단용 초음파 장치의 임상적 유용성을 높이기 위한 전략은 무엇인가요?

목차

제1장 서문

제2장 조사 방법

제3장 주요 요약

제4장 시장 개요

제5장 시장 인사이트

제6장 미국 관세의 누적 영향, 2025

제7장 AI의 누적 영향, 2025

제8장 진단용 초음파 장치 시장 : 디바이스 유형별

제9장 진단용 초음파 장치 시장 : 기술별

제10장 진단용 초음파 장치 시장 : 트랜스듀서 유형별

제11장 진단용 초음파 장치 시장 : 주파수별

제12장 진단용 초음파 장치 시장 : 용도별

제13장 진단용 초음파 장치 시장 : 최종사용자별

제14장 진단용 초음파 장치 시장 : 지역별

제15장 진단용 초음파 장치 시장 : 그룹별

제16장 진단용 초음파 장치 시장 : 국가별

제17장 미국의 진단용 초음파 장치 시장

제18장 중국의 진단용 초음파 장치 시장

제19장 경쟁 구도

The Diagnostic Ultrasound Devices Market was valued at USD 10.29 billion in 2025 and is projected to grow to USD 10.82 billion in 2026, with a CAGR of 5.35%, reaching USD 14.82 billion by 2032.

KEY MARKET STATISTICS
Base Year [2025] USD 10.29 billion
Estimated Year [2026] USD 10.82 billion
Forecast Year [2032] USD 14.82 billion
CAGR (%) 5.35%

How innovations in imaging hardware, software intelligence, and workflow integration are redefining the clinical value proposition of diagnostic ultrasound devices

Diagnostic ultrasound devices have evolved from single-purpose imaging tools into versatile platforms that underpin a broad range of clinical pathways, from point-of-care triage to high-acuity imaging suites. Advances in transducer design, signal processing, and software-driven image enhancement have expanded clinical utility across specialties while simultaneously lowering barriers to adoption through improved portability and workflow integration. As a result, ultrasound has become a primary imaging modality for many clinicians seeking radiation-free, real-time visualization that supports faster decision-making and procedural guidance.

Moreover, the convergence of cloud-enabled workflows, AI-assisted image interpretation, and interoperable data standards has accelerated the transition from modality-centric deployment to ecosystem-centric solutions. These developments allow providers to embed ultrasound into routine patient encounters, remote consultations, and decentralized care models. Consequently, stakeholders-including clinicians, device developers, and health system leaders-must reassess procurement criteria, training pathways, and integration strategies to extract clinical value while preserving diagnostic accuracy.

Transitioning from legacy expectations, modern ultrasound procurement emphasizes user experience, lifecycle support, and software ecosystems as much as transducer performance. This shift has profound implications for clinical adoption patterns, capital allocation, and partnership models between technology vendors and health systems.

Converging technology, clinical practice, and commercial models that together are reshaping how diagnostic ultrasound is accessed, integrated, and monetized across care settings

The landscape for diagnostic ultrasound is experiencing transformative shifts driven by multiple intersecting forces. First, miniaturization and advances in transducer materials have enabled the proliferation of handheld and portable systems that bring imaging to the bedside and community settings. These devices expand access while prompting new training and credentialing paradigms, since clinicians outside radiology increasingly rely on point-of-care ultrasound to inform immediate clinical decisions.

Second, software and algorithmic innovations-particularly in image reconstruction, automated measurement, and anomaly detection-are reshaping clinical workflows by reducing operator dependence and shortening time to actionable insight. In parallel, cloud-native architectures and secure data exchange protocols are facilitating longitudinal image management and remote review, enabling multidisciplinary collaboration across care teams.

Third, regulatory and reimbursement environments are adapting to novel delivery models, incentivizing diagnostic efficiency and value-based care. As a result, vendors are diversifying business models to include subscription-based imaging platforms, outcome-linked service agreements, and integrated solutions that bundle devices with analytics and training. Consequently, stakeholders must navigate an environment in which hardware design, software ecosystems, and commercial models are co-evolving, creating both opportunities for differentiation and pressure to establish durable clinical evidence and interoperability.

Assessing how cumulative tariff shifts influence supply chain resilience, sourcing strategies, and procurement decision-making across diagnostic ultrasound device manufacturers and providers

United States tariff policies enacted in recent periods have introduced new considerations for global supply chains, sourcing decisions, and cost structures within the diagnostic ultrasound ecosystem. Tariff-induced changes in component and finished-goods flows have compelled manufacturers to reassess sourcing geographies, optimize bill-of-materials strategies, and accelerate localization of critical subsystems. In turn, procurement teams within health systems and distributors face greater volatility in lead times and supplier availability, requiring more robust vendor diversification and contingency planning.

Furthermore, tariffs have heightened the importance of supply-chain transparency and traceability, prompting both OEMs and contract manufacturers to invest in digital tools that map supplier relationships and material provenance. These investments support faster scenario planning and better negotiation leverage when adjusting to tariff regimes or trade policy shifts. Consequently, organizations that proactively redesign supply networks and invest in dual-sourcing strategies tend to maintain steadier production rhythms and reduce patient-impacting service disruptions.

Ultimately, the cumulative impact of tariffs is not limited to direct cost adjustments; it also amplifies strategic emphasis on manufacturing resilience, regulatory alignment for cross-border shipments, and partnerships that can absorb policy-driven shocks. As transitional measures, many industry participants are negotiating longer service contracts and expanding aftermarket capabilities to preserve clinical continuity during procurement cycles.

Integrated segmentation analysis revealing how device architecture, imaging technologies, clinical applications, transducer choices, user environments, and frequency options shape procurement and utilization

Segment-level dynamics reveal distinct adoption patterns and operational priorities when diagnostic ultrasound devices are viewed through technical and clinical lenses. Based on device type, handheld devices prioritize immediate accessibility and rapid deployment in point-of-care scenarios, while portable systems, which include compact systems and laptop systems, balance mobility with expanded imaging capabilities. Standalone systems, such as cart-based and tower systems, continue to serve high-acuity and specialty imaging environments where advanced processing and expandability remain essential.

Based on technology, two-dimensional ultrasound remains foundational for many standard examinations, while three- and four-dimensional modalities enhance volumetric assessment in obstetrics and specialized imaging. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound is gaining traction for lesion characterization and perfusion studies, and Doppler ultrasound retains a central role in vascular and hemodynamic assessments. Based on application, cardiology and vascular domains demand high temporal resolution and sensitive Doppler performance, whereas musculoskeletal and obstetrics applications emphasize high-frequency probes and detailed tissue differentiation.

Based on transducer type, convex and linear arrays enable broad abdominal and superficial imaging respectively, while endocavity and phased arrays address niche access and deep-structure visualization. Mechanical transducers maintain utility in specific procedural contexts. Based on end user, ambulatory care and clinics prioritize ease of use and rapid throughput, diagnostic centers value throughput and image storage workflows, and hospitals focus on modality interoperability and advanced feature sets. Based on frequency, high-frequency probes deliver superior resolution for superficial structures, whereas low-frequency transducers penetrate deeper anatomy, shaping device selection according to clinical intent and patient population.

Comparative regional insights into how healthcare delivery models, regulatory pathways, and adoption dynamics drive divergent demand and commercialization strategies for diagnostic ultrasound

Regional dynamics influence adoption pathways, regulatory navigation, and commercial strategies across the globe. In the Americas, health systems increasingly emphasize point-of-care diagnostics and integrated care pathways, which drive demand for portable and handheld devices that can support community-based care and emergency medicine. This emphasis is accompanied by investment in clinical training programs and point-of-care credentialing initiatives that expand ultrasound use beyond traditional imaging departments.

In Europe, Middle East & Africa, regulatory harmonization efforts and diverse healthcare delivery models create a mosaic of opportunities and constraints. Some jurisdictions prioritize centralized imaging centers and specialist-driven workflows, while others accelerate decentralized diagnostics to improve access in underserved regions. As a result, vendors frequently deploy differentiated go-to-market approaches that combine direct partnerships with distributors and targeted clinical education programs to address heterogenous reimbursement and regulatory regimes.

In Asia-Pacific, rapid technology adoption, significant private-sector investment, and expanding outpatient infrastructure contribute to a dynamic environment for device innovation and scaling. Additionally, regional manufacturing hubs and localized supply chains support faster product iterations and cost-competitive offerings. Across these geographies, successful strategies commonly integrate regulatory engagement, clinician training, and enduring service models to ensure sustained clinical adoption and long-term device utilization.

How product-service integration, clinical partnerships, and software ecosystems create differentiation and long-term competitive advantage in diagnostic ultrasound

Competitive dynamics in the diagnostic ultrasound landscape are defined by firms that combine hardware innovation with comprehensive software and service ecosystems. Leading device manufacturers differentiate through integrated imaging suites that pair advanced transducer design with AI-enabled image processing and workflow automation. Strategic partnerships with clinical centers and academic institutions further validate clinical utility, accelerating acceptance among specialist users and multidisciplinary teams.

In addition to core imaging capabilities, companies that invest in developer ecosystems, open APIs, and third-party application support cultivate network effects that extend device value beyond initial procurement. Service excellence, including rapid field support and remote diagnostics, strengthens customer retention and underpins recurring revenue opportunities. Companies that expand into training and certification services help bridge the competence gap created by broader device deployment across non-radiology clinicians.

Finally, firms that emphasize regulatory compliance, cybersecurity, and data interoperability position themselves as trusted partners for large health systems seeking enterprise-grade imaging solutions. These capabilities, combined with robust post-market surveillance and evidence-generation activities, create durable differentiation in a landscape where technological parity on core imaging metrics is increasingly common.

Practical strategic imperatives for manufacturers and providers to strengthen resilience, accelerate clinical adoption, and align product development with care pathways

Industry leaders should prioritize several actionable initiatives to preserve clinical relevance and commercial momentum. First, invest in modular platform architectures that allow incremental feature upgrades and seamless integration with electronic health records and imaging archives. This approach reduces upgrade friction for providers and enables continuous enhancement without wholesale hardware replacement. Second, accelerate clinician-centered design by embedding workflow studies and frontline user feedback into product roadmaps, thereby minimizing training burdens and optimizing adoption across specialties.

Third, strengthen supply-chain resilience through supplier diversification, dual-sourcing of critical components, and investments in digital traceability that allow rapid scenario planning in the face of tariff or trade disruptions. Fourth, couple device rollouts with comprehensive training, credentialing, and remote proctoring programs to ensure that expanded deployment results in consistently high-quality imaging and appropriate clinical use. Fifth, build evidence-generation programs that produce peer-reviewed clinical validation and real-world outcome studies to support reimbursement dialogues and institutional purchasing committees.

By pursuing these actions in combination-technology modularity, clinician-centered design, supply-chain robustness, workforce enablement, and rigorous evidence generation-manufacturers and providers can reduce adoption friction, protect margin, and deliver measurable clinical impact.

Methodological rigor combining primary clinician interviews, technical validation, supply-chain mapping, and independent peer review to derive actionable diagnostic ultrasound insights

This study synthesizes primary and secondary research to develop a comprehensive view of diagnostic ultrasound device dynamics. Primary research involved structured interviews with clinical users across specialties, procurement professionals, and technical leaders within imaging departments to capture operational priorities, adoption drivers, and unmet clinical needs. Secondary research encompassed peer-reviewed literature, regulatory filings, and manufacturer documentation to validate technical specifications, regulatory trajectories, and clinical applications.

Data collection emphasized triangulation across sources to mitigate bias and ensure robust conclusions. The methodology included qualitative coding of interview transcripts, comparative analysis of device feature sets, and assessment of technology readiness levels for emerging modalities. Additionally, supply-chain mapping employed publicly available customs and trade datasets alongside supplier disclosures to evaluate sourcing risks and potential mitigation pathways. Throughout the research process, ethical considerations and data privacy standards guided the handling of proprietary and clinician-provided insights.

Finally, peer review with independent clinical advisors and technical specialists strengthened the study's analytical rigor and ensured that recommendations reflect operational realities and stakeholder priorities rather than theoretical constructs.

Synthesis of technological progress and healthcare delivery transformation that clarifies how diagnostic ultrasound will continue to expand clinical utility while demanding strategic vendor partnerships

Diagnostic ultrasound devices stand at the intersection of technological opportunity and evolving healthcare delivery needs. Advances in transducer engineering, algorithmic interpretation, and cloud-enabled workflows have collectively broadened the modality's clinical reach, enabling new care models that prioritize speed, accessibility, and procedural guidance. At the same time, commercial and regulatory shifts require stakeholders to balance innovation with operational resilience, particularly in the face of supply-chain volatility and changing reimbursement paradigms.

Looking ahead, the most successful organizations will integrate modular hardware approaches with robust software ecosystems, clinical training programs, and evidence-generation efforts that demonstrate measurable outcomes. This integrated approach will allow vendors to partner with health systems in ways that extend beyond transactional device sales toward sustained clinical collaboration. Consequently, decision-makers should evaluate procurement not only through immediate performance metrics but also through long-term considerations of interoperability, lifecycle support, and the vendor's capacity to co-create clinical value.

Table of Contents

1. Preface

  • 1.1. Objectives of the Study
  • 1.2. Market Definition
  • 1.3. Market Segmentation & Coverage
  • 1.4. Years Considered for the Study
  • 1.5. Currency Considered for the Study
  • 1.6. Language Considered for the Study
  • 1.7. Key Stakeholders

2. Research Methodology

  • 2.1. Introduction
  • 2.2. Research Design
    • 2.2.1. Primary Research
    • 2.2.2. Secondary Research
  • 2.3. Research Framework
    • 2.3.1. Qualitative Analysis
    • 2.3.2. Quantitative Analysis
  • 2.4. Market Size Estimation
    • 2.4.1. Top-Down Approach
    • 2.4.2. Bottom-Up Approach
  • 2.5. Data Triangulation
  • 2.6. Research Outcomes
  • 2.7. Research Assumptions
  • 2.8. Research Limitations

3. Executive Summary

  • 3.1. Introduction
  • 3.2. CXO Perspective
  • 3.3. Market Size & Growth Trends
  • 3.4. Market Share Analysis, 2025
  • 3.5. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2025
  • 3.6. New Revenue Opportunities
  • 3.7. Next-Generation Business Models
  • 3.8. Industry Roadmap

4. Market Overview

  • 4.1. Introduction
  • 4.2. Industry Ecosystem & Value Chain Analysis
    • 4.2.1. Supply-Side Analysis
    • 4.2.2. Demand-Side Analysis
    • 4.2.3. Stakeholder Analysis
  • 4.3. Porter's Five Forces Analysis
  • 4.4. PESTLE Analysis
  • 4.5. Market Outlook
    • 4.5.1. Near-Term Market Outlook (0-2 Years)
    • 4.5.2. Medium-Term Market Outlook (3-5 Years)
    • 4.5.3. Long-Term Market Outlook (5-10 Years)
  • 4.6. Go-to-Market Strategy

5. Market Insights

  • 5.1. Consumer Insights & End-User Perspective
  • 5.2. Consumer Experience Benchmarking
  • 5.3. Opportunity Mapping
  • 5.4. Distribution Channel Analysis
  • 5.5. Pricing Trend Analysis
  • 5.6. Regulatory Compliance & Standards Framework
  • 5.7. ESG & Sustainability Analysis
  • 5.8. Disruption & Risk Scenarios
  • 5.9. Return on Investment & Cost-Benefit Analysis

6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025

7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025

8. Diagnostic Ultrasound Devices Market, by Device Type

  • 8.1. Handheld Devices
  • 8.2. Portable Systems
    • 8.2.1. Compact Systems
    • 8.2.2. Laptop Systems
  • 8.3. Standalone Systems
    • 8.3.1. Cart Based Systems
    • 8.3.2. Tower Systems

9. Diagnostic Ultrasound Devices Market, by Technology

  • 9.1. 2D Ultrasound
  • 9.2. 3D and 4D Ultrasound
  • 9.3. Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound
  • 9.4. Doppler Ultrasound

10. Diagnostic Ultrasound Devices Market, by Transducer Type

  • 10.1. Convex Array
  • 10.2. Endocavity Transducer
  • 10.3. Linear Array
  • 10.4. Mechanical Transducer
  • 10.5. Phased Array

11. Diagnostic Ultrasound Devices Market, by Frequency

  • 11.1. High Frequency
  • 11.2. Low Frequency

12. Diagnostic Ultrasound Devices Market, by Application

  • 12.1. Cardiology
  • 12.2. Musculoskeletal
  • 12.3. Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • 12.4. Radiology
  • 12.5. Urology
  • 12.6. Vascular

13. Diagnostic Ultrasound Devices Market, by End User

  • 13.1. Ambulatory Care
  • 13.2. Clinic
  • 13.3. Diagnostic Center
  • 13.4. Hospital

14. Diagnostic Ultrasound Devices Market, by Region

  • 14.1. Americas
    • 14.1.1. North America
    • 14.1.2. Latin America
  • 14.2. Europe, Middle East & Africa
    • 14.2.1. Europe
    • 14.2.2. Middle East
    • 14.2.3. Africa
  • 14.3. Asia-Pacific

15. Diagnostic Ultrasound Devices Market, by Group

  • 15.1. ASEAN
  • 15.2. GCC
  • 15.3. European Union
  • 15.4. BRICS
  • 15.5. G7
  • 15.6. NATO

16. Diagnostic Ultrasound Devices Market, by Country

  • 16.1. United States
  • 16.2. Canada
  • 16.3. Mexico
  • 16.4. Brazil
  • 16.5. United Kingdom
  • 16.6. Germany
  • 16.7. France
  • 16.8. Russia
  • 16.9. Italy
  • 16.10. Spain
  • 16.11. China
  • 16.12. India
  • 16.13. Japan
  • 16.14. Australia
  • 16.15. South Korea

17. United States Diagnostic Ultrasound Devices Market

18. China Diagnostic Ultrasound Devices Market

19. Competitive Landscape

  • 19.1. Market Concentration Analysis, 2025
    • 19.1.1. Concentration Ratio (CR)
    • 19.1.2. Herfindahl Hirschman Index (HHI)
  • 19.2. Recent Developments & Impact Analysis, 2025
  • 19.3. Product Portfolio Analysis, 2025
  • 19.4. Benchmarking Analysis, 2025
  • 19.5. Canon Medical Systems Corporation
  • 19.6. Esaote S.p.A.
  • 19.7. FUJIFILM Holdings Corporation
  • 19.8. GE Healthcare
  • 19.9. Hitachi, Ltd.
  • 19.10. Koninklijke Philips N.V.
  • 19.11. Neusoft Medical Systems Co., Ltd.
  • 19.12. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
  • 19.13. Shenzhen Mindray Bio-Medical Electronics Co., Ltd.
  • 19.14. Siemens Healthineers AG
  • 19.15. SonoScape Medical Corporation
  • 19.16. United Imaging Healthcare
샘플 요청 목록
0 건의 상품을 선택 중
목록 보기
전체삭제