Hemodialysis Hollow Fiber Membranes Patents: Leader & Long Tail 2026
- One filer dominates. The leading assignee holds 42 of the records behind a 19-company ranking, with fifth place at just 3 and tenth at 1 — a steep drop-off after the top name.
- Filing has gone quiet. The trend peaked at 6 records in 2018 and has since fallen to 0 by the most recent complete year, though publication lag means recent filings are still understated.
- Claims sit almost entirely in two classes. A61M and B01D each cover more than 80% of the 56 records in scope, while spinning-process and nanotechnology classes barely register.
What this landscape covers
This landscape maps 56 published records at the intersection of hemodialysis membranes and the technical language that separates a working dialyzer from a research concept: middle molecule clearance, albumin loss, sieving coefficient, fiber inner diameter, spinning process and pore size distribution. The scope is narrow by design — it captures documents that argue about how a membrane performs, not general dialysis equipment.
Coverage runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, activity in the last one to two years will read lower here than it will once those filings clear examination and publish.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 56 records: how filing activity moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
A single peak, then decline
Filings rose to a peak of 6 in 2018 and have since tapered to 0 by the most recent complete year in scope. With fewer than four complete years remaining once the publication lag is accounted for, no growth rate can be stated from this trend.
Concentrated in two subclasses
A61M (devices for body fluids) and B01D (separation processes including filtration) each appear in more than 80% of the 56 records, confirming that most claims are written as device or filtration mechanics rather than as materials chemistry. A61K and A61P appear in a minority of records, and the fibre-manufacturing classes — D01D, D01F, D04H — and B82Y nanotechnology each cover only one or two records.
Shares are the percentage of the 56 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Hemodialysis Hollow Fiber Membranes with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about hemodialysis hollow fiber membranes and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this space
High cut-off hemodialysis membrane for use in liver dialysis
A system for liver dialysis makes use of a high cut-off hemodialysis membrane for removing water-soluble and protein-bound toxins from the blood of a person in need. A high cut-off hollow fiber hemodialysis membrane has improved potential to remove albumin-bound toxins and inflammatory mediators.Filed by Gambro Lundia, published 2012-12-06 as US20120305486A1 — one of the most-cited records in this dataset.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20120305487A1 | Method for Treating Anemia in Hemodialysis Patients | 85 |
| 2 | US20070119781A1 | Apparatus and method for enhanced hemodialysis performance | 35 |
| 3 | US20120305486A1 | High cut-off hemodialysis membrane for use in liver dialysis | 29 |
| 4 | EP2380610A1 | High cut-off hemodialysis membrane for use in liver dialysis | 25 |
| 5 | WO2012164019A1 | Method of treating anemia in hemodialysis patients | 17 |
| 6 | WO2011131534A1 | High cut-off hemodialysis membrane for use in liver dialysis | 16 |
| 7 | US5624561A | Cellulose acetate hemodialysis membrane | 11 |
| 8 | US4354938A | Hemodialysis membrane and process and apparatus for using same in hemodialysis | 11 |
| 9 | EP2862583A1 | Perm selective membrane for treating vascular calcification in chronic hemodialysis patients | 7 |
| 10 | US9974895B2 | Permselective membrane for treating vascular calcifications in chronic hemodialysis patients | 6 |
Citation counts favour older documents that have had more time to accumulate references — read them as a signal of influence within this corpus, not 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 data says about this field
Three patterns stand out once the records are pulled apart by assignee, class and geography.
One assignee dominates the ranking
The leading assignee accounts for 42 records in a 19-company ranking where fifth place holds only 3 and tenth place holds 1. That gap is wide enough that new entrants are not competing against a crowded middle — they are competing against one incumbent's portfolio.
Claims read as devices and filtration, not materials
A61M and B01D between them touch the overwhelming majority of records, meaning most filings are written around device configuration and separation mechanics. The spinning-process classes that would cover how the fiber itself is manufactured — D01D, D01F — appear in only one or two records each.
Activity has cooled since 2018
The filing trend peaked at 6 records in 2018 and has fallen to 0 by the latest complete year. Recent-year momentum by assignee shows the identifiable leaders all at 0 in the latest year, though publication lag means this likely understates true filing activity in progress.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to hemodialysis hollow fiber membranes, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Gambro Lundia AB | Charite Universitatsmedizin Berlin | 10 |
| VAN GEERTRUYDEN WILLIAM HERMAN | HUANG ZHONGPING | 3 |
| VAN GEERTRUYDEN WILLIAM HERMAN | GAO DAYONG | 2 |
| VAN GEERTRUYDEN WILLIAM HERMAN | EMV TECH | 2 |
| HUANG ZHONGPING | GAO DAYONG | 2 |
| HUANG ZHONGPING | EMV TECH | 2 |
| GAO DAYONG | EMV TECH | 2 |
| Gambro Lundia AB | STORR MARKUS | 1 |
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset. The strongest pair links the leading assignee with an academic medical centre at a count of 10, while a separate individual-inventor pair recurs at lower counts — collaboration here looks more like sponsored academic research than industry consortia.
Who is filing, and where the ground is open
The ranking lists 19 companies total, counted in records. Most of the field beyond the leader is a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants, several of them individual inventors or academic institutions rather than device manufacturers.
A single incumbent portfolio
The leading assignee's 42 records dominate the ranking. Its strongest co-filing relationship, with an academic medical centre at 10 shared records, suggests a research partnership feeding clinical validation into the patent estate rather than the estate being purely internal R&D.
Universities and research institutes hold small, specific claims
Entities such as academic medical centres and technical institutes appear well down the ranking with single-digit counts. Their filings tend to cluster around narrow performance claims — sieving coefficient or middle molecule clearance — rather than broad device architecture.
Individual inventors form their own small cluster
Two named individual inventors co-file with each other and with a third collaborator, forming a small independent cluster distinct from the corporate and academic filers. This pattern is common in medical device niches where an inventor files before commercial partnership is secured.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Gambro Lundia AB | 0 | — |
| Charite Universitatsmedizin Berlin | 0 | — |
| Toyobo Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| VAN GEERTRUYDEN WILLIAM HERMAN | 0 | — |
| HUANG ZHONGPING | 0 | — |
| Indian Institute of Technology Madras | 0 | — |
| GAO DAYONG | 0 | — |
| EMV TECH | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether you are clearing a design or scouting a gap.
Check freedom-to-operate around spinning process claims
With only one or two records in D01D and D01F, a spinning-process-specific claim may face less prior art than a device-level claim in A61M or B01D. Confirm this against the full claim text, not just the class counts.
Run a freedom-to-operate check in EurekaWatch the leading assignee's academic partnership
The 10-record co-filing link between the leading assignee and an academic medical centre is the strongest collaboration signal in the dataset. Tracking that partnership's future publications may surface the next wave of high cut-off membrane claims early.
Track assignee activity in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
One assignee leads with 42 records in a 19-company ranking, well ahead of the rest of the field where fifth place holds only 3 records and tenth place holds 1. This is a steep concentration at the very top with a long tail below it, rather than a crowded competitive middle. Anyone evaluating this space should treat that leader's portfolio as the primary reference point for freedom-to-operate work.
Filing peaked at 6 records in 2018 and has declined to 0 by the most recent complete year in the dataset. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the last one to two years are likely undercounted and should not be read as a hard stop in activity. There are too few complete years remaining after accounting for that lag to state a reliable growth or decline rate.
The large majority of the 56 records in scope fall under A61M, devices for body fluids, at 82.1%, and B01D, separation processes including filtration, at 80.4%. Far fewer touch A61K medicinal preparations or A61P therapeutic activity, and the classes covering fibre manufacturing itself — D01D, D01F, D04H — each account for only one or two records. That imbalance suggests most inventive effort has gone into device configuration and filtration mechanics rather than into how the fiber is spun or structured.
The spinning-process and fibre-structure classes are thin relative to the device and filtration classes, which is where under-claimed ground appears to sit. Specific candidates include hollow fiber spinning process parameters, pore size distribution control methods, and nanostructured membrane surfaces, none of which show heavy filing density in this dataset. A first claim in these areas would need to be checked against the full text of the few existing records rather than assumed clear from class counts alone.
US20120305486A1, assigned to Gambro Lundia and published 2012-12-06, describes a high cut-off hollow fiber hemodialysis membrane designed to remove albumin-bound toxins and inflammatory mediators for liver dialysis applications. It is one of the most-cited records in this dataset, alongside a closely related EP filing covering the same high cut-off membrane concept. Its citation count signals strong influence within this corpus, though as with any older highly-cited document that reflects accumulated references over time rather than a claim to current market importance.
Research Hemodialysis Hollow Fiber Membranes in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole hemodialysis hollow fiber membranes 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.