Glucose Sensor Insertion Patents: Who Leads, Trends 2026
- Three companies cover the entire ranked field. the assignee ranking returns just three companies, together accounting for all 137 records in scope — there is no long tail to speak of.
- Filing peaked in 2021 and has pulled back sharply since. annual filings ran from 16 in 2021 to 5 in 2024, a -69% swing, though 2025-26 counts are still filling in under publication lag.
- Claims cluster almost entirely in one IPC subclass. A61B accounts for 98.5% of the 137 records, meaning diagnosis-and-surgery claims dominate while body-fluid devices and informatics stay marginal.
Filing growth compares 2021 (16 records) with 2024 (5) — 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.
What this landscape covers
Glucose sensor insertion and wear covers the mechanical and biological interface between a continuous glucose monitor and the body: insertion applicators, adhesive patch chemistry, sensor filament geometry, foreign body response and skin irritation, and the wear-time performance that governs how long a sensor stays on and stays accurate. This is a narrower, more mechanically-focused slice of diabetes technology than sensing chemistry itself — it sits at the boundary of medical device engineering, materials science and dermatology.
The 137 records in scope span 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off, drawing from receiving offices led by the United States and the European Patent Office, with meaningful filing activity also routed through Germany, Australia, Norway and Austria.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 137 records: how filing volume moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
A sharp rise and pullback around 2021
Filings climbed to a peak of 16 in 2021 before falling to 5 by 2024, a -69% change over that span. Counts for 2025 and 2026 are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the recent-year dip should not be read as the field cooling — it is a data artefact until those years finish filling in.
Diagnosis-and-surgery claims dominate
A61B (diagnosis and surgery) appears in 98.5% of the 137 records, far ahead of A61M devices for body fluids at 5.1%, G16H healthcare informatics at 4.4%, G06F data processing at 2.9% and H04L data transmission at 1.5%. Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, these shares add up to well over 100% — the takeaway is that almost every filing touches the core insertion/wear mechanics, while software and connectivity angles are filed far less often within this search scope.
Shares are the percentage of the 137 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Glucose Sensor Insertion and Wear with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about glucose sensor insertion and wear and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited filings in this space
Analyte sensor devices, connections, and methods (US20230210406A1)
Devices associated with on-body analyte sensor units are disclosed. These devices include any of packaging and/or loading systems, applicators and elements of the on-body sensor units themselves. Also, various approaches to connecting electrochemical analyte sensors to and/or within associated on-body analyte sensor units are disclosed. The connector approaches variously involve the use of unique sensor and ancillary element arrangements to facilitate assembly of separate electronics assemblies and sensor elements that are kept apart until the end user brings them together.Filed by Abbott Diabetes Care, published 2023-07-06.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20170188912A1 | Transcutaneous analyte sensor systems and methods | 271 |
| 2 | US20170188910A1 | Transcutaneous analyte sensor systems and methods | 153 |
| 3 | WO2017116915A1 | Transcutaneous analyte sensor systems and methods | 97 |
| 4 | US20170188911A1 | Transcutaneous analyte sensor systems and methods | 61 |
| 5 | US20210196162A1 | Transcutaneous analyte sensor systems and methods | 26 |
| 6 | US10898115B2 | Transcutaneous analyte sensor systems and methods | 16 |
| 7 | US11166657B2 | Transcutaneous analyte sensor systems and methods | 14 |
| 8 | US11375932B2 | Transcutaneous analyte sensor systems and methods | 12 |
| 9 | US20210196163A1 | Transcutaneous analyte sensor systems and methods | 11 |
| 10 | US11602291B2 | Transcutaneous analyte sensor systems and methods | 10 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations within the searched corpus — treat them as a signal of influence on subsequent filers, not as a measure of current technical importance.
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 companies hold the entire ranked field, filing activity has pulled back from a 2021 peak, and claim density sits almost entirely in one IPC subclass — each of those facts changes where a new filer should and should not put effort.
No long tail in this field
The assignee ranking returns only three companies, and together they account for all 137 records in scope. That is unusually tight for a device category — there is essentially no fragmented middle tier of smaller filers to license around or acquire into.
Peak filing has passed, for now
Annual filings dropped from a peak of 16 in 2021 to 5 in 2024. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, 2025-26 figures are not yet complete and should not be read as continued decline until later data cuts confirm it.
One subclass absorbs nearly every filing
A61B diagnosis-and-surgery claims appear in 98.5% of the 137 records. Adjacent subclasses covering body-fluid devices, healthcare informatics, data processing and data transmission each appear in under 6% of records, suggesting claim space outside the core mechanical/biological interface is comparatively open.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to glucose sensor insertion and wear, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the field
Filing in glucose sensor insertion and wear is concentrated among a small number of device manufacturers rather than spread across a fragmented ecosystem of smaller entrants.
One assignee dominates the ranking
The leading assignee accounts for the large majority of the 137 records in scope, a concentration level that leaves comparatively little room for a new entrant to build a broad position without engaging closely with the leader's existing claims.
A closed rather than open competitive set
Only three companies appear in the assignee ranking at all, and between them they account for every record in scope. This is not a top-50 or top-100 cut — it is the entire ranked field the dataset returns.
Recent-year filings are quiet across the board
All three ranked assignees show no filings in the latest tracked year, consistent with the broader pullback from the 2021 peak and with publication lag still filling in the most recent years rather than a confirmed stop in activity.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Dexcom | 0 | -100% |
| Abbott Diabetes Care | 0 | — |
| Tandem Diabetes Care | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a tightly held field with a specific open question: whether the 2025-26 dip is real or an artefact of publication lag.
Track the next data cut for 2025-26 completion
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the current 2025-26 figures will keep rising. Re-running this landscape after the next data refresh will show whether filing has genuinely slowed from the 2021 peak or simply hasn't finished publishing yet.
Monitor filing trends in EurekaMap the leader's claim boundaries before filing nearby
With one assignee holding the large majority of the 137 records, a freedom-to-operate review of that portfolio's applicator and adhesive claims is a more useful next step than a broad landscape scan.
Run a claim comparison in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches for a first-filer position
Subclasses like healthcare informatics and data transmission stay under 6% of records despite the core mechanical space being saturated, which is where a first, well-drafted claim could still land cleanly.
Explore white space in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
The assignee ranking for this dataset returns only three companies, and together they account for all 137 records in scope. The leading assignee alone holds 114 of those records, making this one of the more concentrated device sub-fields rather than one with a broad competitive spread. Anyone assessing freedom to operate here should start with that leader's applicator and adhesive claims before looking anywhere else.
Filing peaked at 16 records in 2021 and had fallen to 5 by 2024, a -69% change over that three-year window. However, publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the 2025 and 2026 counts in this dataset are still incomplete and should not yet be read as confirmation of a continued decline. A future data cut covering 2025-26 in full will give a more reliable read on whether the pullback is real.
Almost every record touches A61B, the diagnosis-and-surgery IPC subclass, which appears in 98.5% of the 137 records and covers the core mechanics of insertion applicators, sensor filaments and wear interfaces. Smaller shares carry classes for body-fluid devices, healthcare informatics, data processing and data transmission, each under 6% of records. That pattern shows claim activity concentrated on the physical insertion and wear mechanism rather than on connected-software or data-processing angles.
The clearest opening is outside the dominant A61B mechanical claims, in areas like sensor-to-app connectivity, wear-time prediction algorithms, and adhesive patch breathability engineering, each of which shows up in only a small fraction of the 137 records. Because the ranked field itself is limited to three companies, a technically specific claim in one of these thinner branches has a reasonable chance of standing apart from existing portfolios. It is still worth a freedom-to-operate check against the leading assignee's broader applicator claims first.
US20230210406A1, filed by Abbott Diabetes Care and published 2023-07-06, covers on-body analyte sensor devices including packaging and loading systems, applicators, and connector approaches that keep electronics assemblies and sensor elements separate until final assembly by the end user. It sits within the same core A61B insertion-mechanics space that dominates this landscape. Anyone designing an applicator or connector mechanism for a wearable glucose sensor should review its claims closely, since it addresses assembly and connection methods that are common chokepoints in this category.
Research Glucose Sensor Insertion and Wear in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole glucose sensor insertion and wear 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.