Embolic Coils and Liquid Embolics Patents: Leaders & Filing Trends 2026
- Concentrated at the top. the five leading assignees hold 43.1% of all 2,981 records in scope, and the leading ten hold 56.3%.
- Filing has cooled from its peak. 2020 was the high-water year at 213 filings, and 2021-to-2024 volume fell 71% (138 to 40) once the data reaches complete years.
- Diagnosis-and-surgery claims dominate the mix. A61B covers 72.1% of records, more than double the next largest class, A61F implants and prostheses at 31.9%.
Filing growth compares 2021 (138 records) with 2024 (40) — 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 2,981 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks patent families filed against embolic coils, liquid embolics and their delivery mechanisms — spanning detachment mechanisms, packing density optimisation, catheter compatibility, liquid embolic polymerization time, post-procedure recanalization control and imaging artifact reduction. The scope runs from 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off, capturing both mechanical coil systems and liquid embolic agent chemistries as they compete for the same clinical indications.
Coverage draws on 2,981 published records with an assignee ranking spanning 100 companies, filing activity from major device makers alongside university and research-institute filers, and receiving-office data concentrated in the United States, Europe and the WIPO PCT channel.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 2,981-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how the underlying technology splits across IPC subclasses.
Filing trend: a 2020 peak followed by a real decline
Annual filings ran from 96 in 2017 to a peak of 213 in 2020, then fell across the last complete comparison window — 138 in 2021 down to 40 in 2024, a 71% drop. Counts for 2025 and 2026 (8 filings so far) are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the tail should not be read as the end of activity, only as data still arriving.
Technology composition: surgery and implant classes anchor the field
A61B (diagnosis and surgery) appears in 72.1% of the 2,981 records, reflecting how much of the claim activity centres on delivery and procedural methods rather than the embolic material itself. A61F implants and prostheses (31.9%) and A61M body-fluid devices (20.9%) follow, while polymer-chemistry classes such as A61K medicinal preparations (10.0%) and C08L polymer compositions (1.7%) show comparatively thin coverage — a signal for where liquid embolic chemistry claims are less crowded than the mechanical coil space.
Shares are the percentage of the 2,981 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Embolic Coils and Liquid Embolics with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about embolic coils and liquid embolics and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this space
Detachment mechanism with a tab for delivering intravascular implants
Systems and methods are provided for delivering and mechanically detaching embolic coils. The systems disclosed herein comprise a mechanical detachment mechanism to intravascularly release an embolic coil. The methods disclosed herein comprise triggering mechanisms to detach embolic coils.Filed by Spartan Micro, Inc., published 2023-05-04 as US20230140095A1.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6511468B1 | Device and method for controlling injection of liquid embolic composition | 2,017 |
| 2 | US20030040772A1 | Delivery devices | 1,279 |
| 3 | US6764510B2 | Devices and methods for heart valve treatment | 1,201 |
| 4 | US20030040771A1 | Methods for creating woven devices | 933 |
| 5 | US7018401B1 | Woven intravascular devices and methods for making the same and apparatus for delivery of the same | 722 |
| 6 | US6454780B1 | Aneurysm neck obstruction device | 693 |
| 7 | US5749894A | Aneurysm closure method | 681 |
| 8 | US6792979B2 | Methods for creating woven devices | 665 |
| 9 | US6036720A | Sheet metal aneurysm neck bridge | 603 |
| 10 | US7077862B2 | Devices and methods for heart valve treatment | 568 |
Citation counts reward older filings that have had more time to accumulate references — treat them as a measure of influence on the field, not of current filing activity.
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 R&D and IP strategy
Reading the filing curve and the technology split together points to where claim space is already occupied and where it is not.
A field led by a small group, not a single dominant player
The top five assignees combined hold 43.1% of all records in scope, and the top ten hold 56.3%. That leaves close to half the field split across a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants, including university and research-institute assignees.
Volume has genuinely pulled back since the 2020 peak
Filings peaked at 213 in 2020 and dropped 71% between 2021 and 2024, the last year the dataset can treat as complete. Recent-year YoY figures for leading assignees are down sharply too, though the very latest years are still filling in as publications catch up to filing dates.
Delivery mechanics are crowded; embolic chemistry is thin
A61B diagnosis-and-surgery claims sit on 72.1% of records, while polymer-composition class C08L sits at just 1.7%. That gap suggests mechanical delivery and detachment claims are heavily staked out, while liquid embolic material chemistry carries comparatively light coverage.
Collaboration is limited and concentrated among a few institutions
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest of them link university and research-institute assignees rather than device manufacturers. This points to most commercial-scale filing happening inside single corporate assignees rather than through joint filings.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to embolic coils and liquid embolics, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the activity has cooled
The leading assignees combine established neurovascular device makers with university and research-institute filers, but recent-year momentum has slowed across the board.
A single filer well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 487 records, more than five times the count at fifth place (91). That gap is the clearest sign of an entrenched position in delivery-mechanism and coil-design claims built up over years of filing.
A steep drop-off after the leader, then a long plateau
Fifth place sits at 91 records and tenth at 69 — a much shallower gap than between first and fifth place. Below the leader, competitive positioning is closer, with device manufacturers and academic assignees interspersed.
Even top filers have pulled back sharply
Recent-year momentum for several of the largest assignees shows year-over-year declines in the -50% to -89% range, with some falling to a single digit of filings in the latest year. This tracks the broader field-wide decline rather than signalling any one company exiting the space.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| MicroVention, Inc. | 1 | -83% |
| Covidien LP | 1 | -89% |
| Texas A&M University | 1 | -50% |
| DePuy Synthes Products, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Squint Medical | 0 | — |
| Codman & Shurtleff, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Boston Scientific Limited | 0 | — |
| Board of Regents, The University of Texas System | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with occupied delivery-mechanism claims and lighter coverage in embolic chemistry — the next step is testing a specific claim against it.
Check freedom-to-operate on a delivery mechanism concept
With A61B claims covering 72.1% of records and a single assignee holding 487 filings, a new detachment or delivery mechanism needs a close prior-art check before development spend.
Run a freedom-to-operate search in EurekaMap the white space in liquid embolic chemistry
Polymer-composition coverage (C08L, 1.7% of records) is thin relative to the mechanical core of the field, suggesting room for material-composition claims that are not blocked by delivery-mechanism patents.
Explore white space with EurekaTrack the leading assignees' recent filings
Even the leading assignees show sharp year-over-year declines in recent filings, which may signal a shift in strategy or portfolio consolidation worth monitoring directly.
Set up assignee monitoring in EurekaCommon questions on embolic coil and liquid embolic patents
The dataset's assignee ranking shows a single leading filer with 487 records, well ahead of the next-largest holders. The top five assignees combined hold 43.1% of all 2,981 records in scope, and the top ten hold 56.3%. Below the leader, the gap narrows considerably — fifth place holds 91 records and tenth place 69 — meaning competitive positioning is closer in the middle of the ranked field than at the very top.
No — filing peaked in 2020 at 213 records and has declined since. Comparing the last two complete years available, filings fell from 138 in 2021 to 40 in 2024, a 71% drop. Figures for 2025 and 2026 look lower still, but that is expected: publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent years are undercounted and should not be read as the true end of activity.
A61B, the diagnosis-and-surgery classification, appears in 72.1% of the 2,981 records in scope, making it by far the largest single category. A61F implants and prostheses follows at 31.9%, and A61M devices for body fluids at 20.9%. Because records can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100%, but the pattern is clear: delivery and procedural mechanics are far more heavily claimed than the embolic material chemistry itself, which sits in smaller classes like A61K (10.0%) and C08L (1.7%).
The clearest gap is in liquid embolic material chemistry: polymer-composition claims (C08L) cover only 1.7% of records and plastics-shaping claims (B29C) a similar 1.7%, versus 72.1% for the mechanical delivery classification A61B. That imbalance suggests polymerization-time control, bioresorbable coatings and imaging-artifact-reducing materials are less densely claimed than coil delivery and detachment mechanisms, making them worth a closer freedom-to-operate look before committing to a mechanical-only design-around.
US20230140095A1, filed by Spartan Micro, Inc. and published 2023-05-04, covers a detachment mechanism with a tab for delivering intravascular implants, specifically a mechanical trigger that releases an embolic coil intravascularly. It sits within the crowded A61B delivery-mechanism space that covers the bulk of records in this field. Anyone designing a new detachable coil delivery system should review this filing's specific claim language on the tab-based trigger mechanism, since mechanical detachment approaches are one of the most heavily claimed areas in the dataset.
Research Embolic Coils and Liquid Embolics in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole embolic coils and liquid embolics 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.