Cerebral Embolic Protection Patents: Leaders & Filing Trends 2026
- Top-heavy but not locked. the top 5 assignees hold 38.0% of all 1,244 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 55.2% — concentrated, but with 90 more ranked companies still filing behind them.
- Filing has pulled back hard from its peak. annual filings ran from 86 in 2021, the peak year, down to 23 in 2024 — a 73% drop over that three-year span, with 2025-2026 numbers still understated by publication lag.
- Claim space concentrates on three IPC subclasses. A61F, A61B and A61M together cover the large majority of records, while braiding (D04C), perforation (B26F) and healthcare informatics (G16H) each sit under 4% — a visible gap in mechanical construction and software-adjacent claims.
Filing growth compares 2021 (86 records) with 2024 (23) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 1,244 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the cerebral embolic protection patent landscape covers
Cerebral embolic protection devices are designed to capture or deflect debris released during structural heart procedures — most commonly transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and carotid interventions — before it can travel to the brain and cause stroke. The 1,244 records in scope span filter catheters, deflection devices, delivery sheaths and the vessel-coverage and pore-size claims that define how much debris a device actually stops. Filing activity concentrates around implant/prosthesis claims (A61F) and surgical/diagnostic claims (A61B), with body-fluid device claims (A61M) close behind — the three subclasses a new filing is most likely to collide with.
Filing accelerated through the late 2010s, peaked in 2021, and has since fallen sharply on the numbers that can be treated as complete. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years in any trend chart will always look thinner than they will eventually turn out to be — that lag, not a genuine collapse in R&D, explains part of the recent-year decline.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
The underlying dataset tracks 1,244 published records from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off, classified across eight IPC subclasses and filed through six major receiving offices.
A sharp pullback from the 2021 peak
Annual filings rose to a peak of 86 in 2021, then fell to 23 by 2024 — a 73% decline over that three-year window. Treat 2025 and 2026 figures as provisional; they will revise upward as more filings publish.
Three subclasses carry the field
A61F (implants & prostheses) appears on 66.4% of the 1,244 records, A61B (diagnosis & surgery) on 53.8%, and A61M (body-fluid devices) on 50.6%. Secondary classes — B23K, D04C, A61N, B26F and G16H — each sit at or below 3.3%, marking the mechanical-construction and informatics branches as comparatively open.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,244 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Cerebral Embolic Protection with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about cerebral embolic protection and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records and a representative filing
TAVR Embolic Protection via Debris Capture or Deflection (US20200368006A1)
Combined embolic protection devices and prosthetic heart valve delivery devices useful for filtering emboli during a heart valve replacement procedure are described. The delivery devices may include a delivery sheath for housing the prosthetic heart valve in collapsed condition for delivery, along with one or more embolic protection filters received within the delivery device during deployment. The filters may be deployed into an expanded condition prior to deploying the prosthetic heart valve, trapping embolic debris entering the bloodstream during the procedure.Filed by ST. JUDE MEDICAL, CARDIOLOGY DIVISION, INC. — published 2020-11-26.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6361545B1 | Perfusion filter catheter | 1,430 |
| 2 | US6336934B1 | Embolic protection device | 1,034 |
| 3 | US20140163664A1 | Integrated system for the ballistic and nonballistic infixion and retrieval of implants with or without drug … | 965 |
| 4 | US6652548B2 | Expansible shearing catheters for thrombus removal | 735 |
| 5 | US20020161394A1 | Aortic filter catheter | 686 |
| 6 | US20010031981A1 | Method and device for locating guidewire and treating chronic total occlusions | 646 |
| 7 | US20100286791A1 | Integrated system for the ballistic and nonballistic infixion and retrieval of implants | 630 |
| 8 | WO1999023976A1 | An embolic protection device | 606 |
| 9 | US20130281788A1 | Methods and systems for treatment of acute ischemic stroke | 494 |
| 10 | US6558405B1 | Embolic filter | 455 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate references — read them as a signal of influence on the field, not as a ranking of current technical relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Three patterns matter more than the raw counts: where claim density already sits, how fast the field is still moving, and where citation weight comes from.
The top of the field is dense, the tail is long
The top 5 assignees account for 38.0% of all 1,244 records and the top 10 for 55.2% — meaningful concentration, but with a full ranked field of 100 companies behind them still holding roughly 45% of filings between them. A new entrant is not filing into a duopoly; it is filing into a crowded but not closed field.
Volume has cooled from its 2021 high
Filings ran from 86 in 2021 down to 23 by 2024, a 73% fall over three years. That is the last year the trend can be read as complete; 2025-2026 will fill in further as publication catches up, so read the recent slope as a lower bound rather than a floor.
Foundational filter-catheter patents still anchor the field
The most-cited record in the corpus is a perfusion filter catheter patent, followed by an embolic protection device patent — both foundational designs that newer filings still have to cite around. High citation counts here reflect age and centrality in the corpus, not that the underlying design is still the best available option.
Mechanical construction and software claims are thin
Braiding/lace construction (D04C), perforation/punching (B26F) and healthcare informatics (G16H) each sit at or below the 3.3% mark held by the smallest major subclasses. Filter-mesh manufacturing methods and software-driven debris-capture monitoring both look under-claimed relative to the core implant and delivery-device classes.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to cerebral embolic protection, with the prior art for and against each one.
Assignees, momentum and where the gate sits
Filing activity clusters around a handful of established medical device firms, with co-filing pairs pointing to sustained internal engineering teams rather than one-off inventions.
One filer sits clearly ahead
The leading assignee holds 149 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 51 and tenth place at 36 — a steep drop-off after the top handful that flattens into a long tail across the rest of the ranked 100.
Even leaders show zero in the latest year
Several of the most active historical filers show 0 filings in the latest year with -100% year-on-year change. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this understates true recent activity rather than confirming a real stop in R&D at these firms.
Co-assignee pairs are concentrated, not broad
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, with the strongest pairing appearing 12 times — evidence of a small number of stable internal inventor-assignee teams rather than a wide web of joint filing across companies.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Silk Road Medical Inc | 0 | -100% |
| Insera Therapeutics Inc | 0 | -100% |
| Salviac Limited | 0 | — |
| W.L. Gore & Associates Inc | 0 | -100% |
| Innovative Cardiovascular Solutions LLC | 0 | -100% |
| WALZMAN DANIEL EZRA | 0 | — |
| Reverse Medical Corporation | 0 | — |
| EV3 Inc | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to specific follow-up questions rather than a single conclusion — the sections below narrow those questions to what a filing or licensing decision actually needs.
Check freedom-to-operate against the top filers
With 55.2% of records held by the ranked top 10, a new filing in filter-catheter or deflection-device claims needs a targeted FTO check against those specific portfolios rather than the field as a whole.
Run an FTO search in EurekaMap the under-claimed branches in detail
Braiding methods, perforation patterns and informatics-adjacent claims sit below 4% of records each — worth a closer claim-by-claim read before assuming the space is open.
Explore white space in EurekaWatch for the 2025-2026 publication catch-up
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the true 2025 and early-2026 filing volumes will only become visible over the next reporting cycles.
Track filing trends in EurekaCommon questions on cerebral embolic protection patents
The dataset ranks 100 assignees by patent family count, and the leading assignee holds 149 records against 51 at fifth place and 36 at tenth place. That is a steep drop after the top few names, meaning leadership is real but not a monopoly — the top 10 together hold 55.2% of all 1,244 records in scope, leaving nearly half the field spread across the remaining 90 ranked companies. Anyone assessing competitive risk should look at the specific claim scope of the top handful rather than assume a single dominant player controls the space.
Filing volume peaked in 2021 at 86 records and had fallen to 23 by 2024, a 73% decline over that three-year span — the last period the trend can be read as complete. Because publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as confirming a continued fall. The honest read is that the field has cooled from its early-2020s peak, with the true current trajectory not yet fully visible in the published data.
Implant and prosthesis claims (IPC class A61F) appear on 66.4% of the 1,244 records in scope, ahead of surgery and diagnosis claims (A61B) at 53.8% and body-fluid device claims (A61M) at 50.6%. These three classes cover the core mechanics of filter and deflection devices and their delivery systems. Smaller classes covering welding/soldering, braiding, electrotherapy, perforation and healthcare informatics each sit at or below 3.3% of records, marking those as comparatively under-claimed branches.
The clearest gaps sit in the smaller IPC classes: braiding and lace construction methods for filter mesh, perforation and punching techniques for deflector components, and healthcare informatics claims tied to procedure-time or debris-capture monitoring software, each covering 3.3% or less of the 1,244 records. These are adjacent to the dense core of implant and delivery-device claims but have not attracted the same filing density. A first claim in one of these areas would typically pair a specific manufacturing or sensing method with the existing filter or deflection device architecture, rather than re-claiming the device itself.
US20200368006A1, filed by ST. JUDE MEDICAL, CARDIOLOGY DIVISION, INC. and published 2020-11-26, claims a combined delivery system that houses a collapsed prosthetic heart valve and one or more embolic protection filters within the same delivery sheath, deploying the filters before the valve to capture debris during TAVR. It is a strong reference point for anyone building an integrated filter-and-valve delivery device rather than a standalone filter catheter. Designing around it generally means separating the filter deployment mechanism from the valve delivery sheath, or using a deflection rather than capture approach, and checking the specific claim language on deployment sequencing before finalising a device architecture.
Research Cerebral Embolic Protection in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole cerebral embolic protection corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.