Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/endoscopic-device-environmental-durability-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Biomedical Devices · Patent LandscapeEndoscopic device patents on environmental durability: sterilization and autoclave resistance claims
- Filing has already peaked. 2020 was the high point at 10 filings; the midpoint year 2022 sits flat at 10, and the trend since reads flat to declining rather than growing.
- Optics and imaging dominate the claim space. A61B (diagnosis & surgery) covers 86 of 103 records and G02B (optical systems) covers 29 — durability claims are being written around the imaging path, not just the sheath material.
- Filing is US- and Europe-led, not Asia-led by volume. United States (44) and the EPO (33) together account for more receiving-office activity than Japan, Germany, AT and China combined.
103
Published Records
-86%
3-Yr Growth (lag-adjusted)
US
Leading Jurisdiction
9
Active Filers Ranked
Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
This review tracks patent families claiming environmental durability for endoscopic devices — specifically sterilization durability, reprocessing-cycle resistance, and autoclave resistance — across endoscopes, endoscopic devices, and endoscopy systems generally. The corpus spans 103 patent families published between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off, drawn from filings that name durability against sterilization or repeated reprocessing as an explicit claim element rather than an incidental property.
Because publication typically lags filing by around eighteen months, the most recent one or two years in any trend line will understate true filing activity; treat the 2025-2026 tail as provisional rather than a real drop-off.
Filing activity, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Endoscopic Device Environmental Durability covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
10,000 free credits to start
The Data
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 103 families: when the claims were filed, and which IPC subclasses carry the durability language.
A flat-to-declining filing curve
Filings climbed from zero in 2017 to a peak of 10 in 2020, then held at 10 again at the 2022 midpoint — there is no compounding growth here, just a plateau that current data does not yet show breaking upward.
Durability claims cluster in optics and adhesives, not just materials
A61B (diagnosis & surgery) leads at 86 records, with G02B (optical elements) at 29 and C09J (adhesives) at 27 close behind — evidence that durability is being engineered into the seal between optical components and the sheath, not treated as a bulk-material property alone. A61L (sterilising & disinfecting) sits comparatively thin at 13, suggesting the sterilization-process side of this problem is less heavily claimed than the device-side response to it.
Shares are the percentage of the 103 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Endoscopic Device Environmental Durability covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Endoscopic Device Environmental Durability with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about endoscopic device environmental durability and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
The most-cited prior art in this space
Representative Filing
Flexible tube for endoscope, endoscopic medical device, and resin composition for covering flexible tube substrate for endoscope
FUJIFILM CORPORATION
A flexible tube for an endoscope has a flexible tube substrate that is flexible and tubular and a resin layer (A) covering the flexible tube substrate. The resin layer (A) includes a thermoplastic resin (a) — a polyamide, polyurethane, polyester, polystyrene, or acrylic resin with a tensile strength at 10% elongation of 10 Pa or more — and a hindered amine compound (b) with a molecular weight of 500 or more. Also provided are an endoscopic medical device including the flexible tube and a resin composition suitable for forming the resin layer.Filed by FUJIFILM CORPORATION, published 2020-12-31 as US20200405918A1.
Highest-cited records
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20100073470A1 | Imaging apparatus and endoscope | 165 |
| 2 | US8345092B2 | Imaging apparatus and endoscope | 72 |
| 3 | US6558316B2 | Endoscope optical system including composition having durability to a sterilization treatment | 58 |
| 4 | US20070129466A1 | Resin composition for sealing medical instruments and medical instrument for endoscope | 43 |
| 5 | US20200297193A1 | Endoscope, image pickup unit, and method of replacing image pickup device in endoscope | 31 |
| 6 | US20030040422A1 | Composition having improved durability to aterilization treatment and endoscope using the same | 30 |
| 7 | US20130012781A1 | endoscope | 20 |
| 8 | US20080114205A1 | Endoscope Apparatus | 18 |
| 9 | JP2006223763A | Endoscope | 17 |
| 10 | US20100225753A1 | Medical instrument | 16 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they are not a measure of current commercial importance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Endoscopic Device Environmental Durability covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Insights
What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Three read-throughs from the trend, the IPC split, and the citation table.
Filing Trend
Peak 2020 at 10
families/year
The window for a first-mover claim narrowed, not opened
With filings flat since 2020 and no clear acceleration into the 2022 midpoint, this is a mature, plateaued claim space rather than an emerging one — new entrants are more likely to be designing around existing claims than staking fresh ground.
Based on 2017-2022 filing counts
IPC Composition
A61B: 86 of 103
records
Durability is claimed at the device-system level
The concentration in A61B rather than A61L indicates most applicants are claiming durability as a property of the assembled endoscope or its optical path, not as a standalone sterilization-process invention — a narrower and more defensible target than it first appears.
IPC subclass distribution across 103 families
Citation Pattern
US20100073470A1: 165 citations
citation count
Foundational imaging-endoscope art still anchors the field
The two highest-cited records both concern imaging apparatus and endoscope construction rather than sterilization chemistry specifically, which means the durability claims most workers cite back to were written around imaging hardware, not coatings or resins.
Top five records by citation count
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to endoscopic device environmental durability, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Endoscopic Device Environmental Durability covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who is filing, and where the field is open
Ranking by patent family count sits in the table above; here is what the pattern behind it means.
Filing Pattern
0 filings in latest year
for every top assignee tracked
No one is currently in an active filing push
Every named assignee in the recent-momentum data shows zero filings in the latest tracked year — consistent with the flat overall trend rather than any single company pulling back while others advance.
Recent-year momentum, top assignees
Collaboration
Strongest pair: 2 co-filings
MATSUMOTO JUN + KAGAWA ICHIRO
Co-filing is rare and thin
The strongest co-assignee pair in the dataset appears on only two shared filings — this is a field of largely independent corporate filers rather than joint-venture or cross-licensing clusters.
Co-assignee pair analysis
Geography
US 44 · EPO 33
receiving-office filings
Filing strategy is US/Europe-weighted
United States and European receiving offices together outpace Japan, Germany, AT and China combined, which should shape where freedom-to-operate searches and opposition monitoring are prioritized.
Receiving-office counts across 103 records
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| FUJIFILM Corporation | 0 | — |
| Olympus Corporation | 0 | — |
| Olympus Medical Systems Corp. | 0 | — |
| Sony Olympus Medical Solutions Inc. | 0 | — |
| TANOUE TETABUYA | 0 | — |
| MATSUMOTO JUN | 0 | — |
| KAGAWA ICHIRO | 0 | — |
| DAHMEN JAN | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Endoscopic Device Environmental Durability covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a plateaued, optics-anchored claim space with thin process-side coverage. Two directions follow from that.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on the imaging-path claims
Given how much durability language sits inside A61B and G02B rather than A61L, any new flexible-tube or seal design should be checked against the imaging-apparatus and optical-composition claims first, not just against sterilization-chemistry art.
Explore in Patsnap EurekaTest the sterilization-process white space
A61L's comparatively thin coverage (13 of 103 records) suggests process-specific sterilization claims — as distinct from device-response claims — remain a narrower, less contested filing target.
Explore in Patsnap EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Endoscopic Device Environmental Durability covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions about this landscape
This landscape identifies 103 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that explicitly claim sterilization durability, reprocessing-cycle resistance, or autoclave resistance for endoscopes and endoscopic devices. That count reflects families rather than raw document counts, which is the fairer unit because it neutralises duplicate continuation and multi-jurisdiction filings of the same invention. Because publication lags filing by roughly eighteen months, the most recent one to two years are undercounted relative to their eventual total.
The trend is flat to declining. Filings rose from zero in 2017 to a peak of 10 in 2020, then held at 10 again at the 2022 midpoint rather than continuing to climb. That pattern, combined with zero recent-year filings across every top assignee tracked, suggests this has become a plateaued claim space rather than an emerging one, though the newest years in any dataset are always understated due to publication lag.
A61B (diagnosis and surgery) dominates with 86 of 103 records, followed by G02B (optical elements and systems) at 29 and C09J (adhesives) at 27. This tells you that durability is mostly being claimed as a property of the assembled endoscope and its optical path, and of the adhesive bonds holding components together, rather than as a standalone sterilization-process invention under A61L, which covers only 13 records.
The dataset's assignee ranking (rendered separately in the full table) is led by major endoscope and imaging manufacturers, alongside individual inventor-assignees. What stands out is not any single dominant leader but that every top-ranked assignee shows zero filings in the most recent tracked year, and co-filing between assignees is rare — the strongest co-assignee pair in the whole dataset shares only two filings together.
The clearest under-claimed branches sit in sterilization-process-specific chemistry (A61L, only 13 records), layered laminate construction (B32B, just 4 records), and additive-driven polymer resistance (C08K, 10 records) — all thin relative to the dense optics and adhesive claim space in A61B and C09J. A first claim in these areas would need to tie a specific stabilizer chemistry or laminate structure to a measurable reprocessing-cycle count rather than a general durability assertion, since general durability language is already heavily occupied.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Endoscopic Device Environmental Durability covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Endoscopic Device Environmental Durability in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole endoscopic device environmental durability 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.