Medical Equipment Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 25.1% concentration at the top. The five leading assignees account for 13,962 of the 55,566 records in scope, but the remaining three-quarters are spread across a long tail of filers.
- Filing volume has pulled back from its 2021 peak. Filings ran from 1,162 in 2021 to 684 in 2024, a 41% decline over that span — the clearest complete-year signal the dataset supports.
- Diagnosis and surgery claims dominate the class mix. A61B covers 14.6% of all records, more than double the next largest subclass, concentrating claim density in imaging- and probe-adjacent hardware.
Filing growth compares 2021 (1,162 records) with 2024 (684) — 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 55,566 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the medical equipment patent record shows
The dataset covers 55,566 published records filed between 2015 and the current data cut-off, spanning diagnostic apparatus, body-fluid devices, electrotherapy systems, healthcare informatics and implant structures. It is built around claim language that ties a device to a clinical measurement, a patient sample, or a device interface — which is why general-purpose electronics and pure software claims appear only where they intersect a medical apparatus. Filing offices are led by the United States, with the EPO and WIPO’s PCT route each contributing a smaller but still substantial share.
Two structural facts shape how this field should be read. First, publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the last one to two years in any trend chart are undercounts, not a real slowdown. Second, a single record often carries several IPC classes at once — a combined diagnostic-and-informatics device, for instance — so class shares in the composition chart add up to more than 100% of records and should never be summed together.
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 trend line and the IPC breakdown below are drawn from the same 55,566 records that anchor every other section of this page.
Filings rose to a 2021 peak, then pulled back
Annual filings climbed from 871 in 2017 to a peak of 1,162 in 2021, then fell to 684 by 2024 — a 41% decline over that three-year span, the last window the dataset treats as complete. Years after 2024 are still filling in as publications catch up to filing dates, so they should not be read as a continuation of the decline.
Diagnosis and surgery claims dominate the class mix
A61B (diagnosis and surgery) appears in 14.6% of all records, well ahead of G16H healthcare informatics at 6.8% and A61M body-fluid devices at 6.4%. Electrotherapy, sterilising equipment, image processing and implant structures each sit in the low single digits, marking them as smaller but still active claim areas rather than white space.
Shares are the percentage of the 55,566 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Medical Equipment Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about medical equipment patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this field
US10542955B2 — Method and apparatus for medical image registration
A method of medical image registration with respect to a volume of interest (VOI) and an apparatus for performing the method are provided. In one embodiment, the method includes obtaining a first medical image of a selected section of the VOI from a first medical apparatus, detecting a sectional image corresponding to the selected section from second medical images previously captured of the VOI based on an anatomical feature appearing in the first medical image, mapping virtual coordinate schemes of the first and second medical images, and tracking a movement of a section.Assigned to Samsung Electronics; granted January 2020.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5400267A | Local in-device memory feature for electrically powered medical equipment | 2,808 |
| 2 | US7048687B1 | Limited use medical probe | 2,368 |
| 3 | US20110082538A1 | Medical device, kit and method for constricting tissue or a bodily orifice, for example, a mitral valve | 1,820 |
| 4 | US6694191B2 | Ambulatory medical apparatus and method having telemetry modifiable control software | 1,760 |
| 5 | US7431694B2 | Method of guiding medical devices | 1,748 |
| 6 | GB2336214A | Preventionof multiple use of limited use devices | 1,748 |
| 7 | US6810290B2 | Ambulatory medical apparatus with hand held communication device | 1,572 |
| 8 | US20080200762A1 | Flexible endoscope shapelock | 1,562 |
| 9 | US6740075B2 | Ambulatory medical apparatus with hand held communication device | 1,562 |
| 10 | US7815565B2 | Endcap for use with an endoscope | 1,525 |
Citation counts accumulate over time inside this searched corpus, so older records are structurally favoured — read them as a signal of influence on later filings, not as a ranking of current commercial 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
These figures point to where claim space is already dense, where it is thinning, and where influence still traces back to older filings.
The top of the field is concentrated, not dominant
13,962 of 55,566 records in scope sit with the five leading assignees, and 16,250 (29.2%) sit with the ranked top ten. That leaves roughly seven in ten records spread across a long tail — a structure that rewards a specific, well-drafted claim over a broad one.
Volume has cooled from its 2021 high
Filings peaked at 1,162 in 2021 and had fallen to 684 by 2024, the last year the dataset treats as complete. Read this as a genuine pullback from peak activity, not as an ongoing collapse — 2025 and 2026 figures are still being filled in by the publication lag.
Diagnostic and surgical hardware carries the densest prior art
A61B alone touches 14.6% of all 55,566 records, more than G16H healthcare informatics and A61M body-fluid devices combined. New entrants drafting device-interface or probe claims here should expect to search past a large, mature body of art before filing.
Influence still traces back to older foundational filings
The most-cited record in scope, on device memory for powered medical equipment, carries 2,808 citations — far ahead of the next entries. That gap reflects age and corpus structure as much as current relevance, so citation counts should be weighted alongside recency, not read alone.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to medical equipment patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and how the field is organised
The ranking spans 100 companies across large diversified device makers, imaging specialists and a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants. Co-assignee pairs suggest where corporate structures or joint research programmes shape filing strategy.
One filer sits well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 8,509 records, an order of magnitude above the fifth-place holder at 580 and the tenth-place holder at 419. That gap is unusually wide even for a concentrated field, and it means freedom-to-operate searches should treat this filer's portfolio as a first-pass filter.
Joint filings cluster around a few corporate groups
The strongest co-assignee pair links a major Korean electronics firm with a national science institute at 50 joint records, followed by a philips entity pair at 30 and a medical-supplies pair at 22. These patterns typically mark internal IP-holding structures or standing research partnerships rather than one-off collaborations.
Recent-year filings are down across the board — with a caveat
Every tracked assignee shows a steep year-over-year drop in the latest year, several exceeding -90%. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this pattern is expected for the most recent filing year and should not be read as firms exiting the field.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Medtronic, Inc. | 2 | -71% |
| Koninklijke Philips N.V. | 1 | -94% |
| FUJIFILM Corporation | 1 | -94% |
| ZOLL Medical Corporation | 1 | -92% |
| Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Korea) | 0 | — |
| Qualcomm Incorporated | 0 | — |
| Samsung Medison Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Olympus Medical Systems Corp. | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with a dominant leader, a long tail, and specific sub-areas still open to new claims. The next steps depend on whether the goal is defensive clearance or offensive filing.
Run a freedom-to-operate check against the leader's portfolio
Given the leading assignee's 8,509 records against a fifth-place figure of 580, any new device-interface or diagnostic hardware concept should be checked against this portfolio before drafting claims.
Screen a concept in EurekaScope claims in the under-claimed branches
Sterilisation informatics, implant sensing integration and body-fluid telemetry interfaces show lower filing density than core A61B claims, leaving room for a narrower, defensible first claim.
Explore white space in EurekaTrack the post-2024 filing signal as it fills in
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, 2025 and 2026 figures will keep rising; re-checking the trend in six to twelve months will show whether the 2021–2024 pullback continued or reversed.
Set up a monitoring search in EurekaCommon questions about the medical equipment patent landscape
One assignee leads the ranking with 8,509 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 580 and the tenth-place holder at 419. Together, the five leading assignees account for 13,962 records, or 25.1% of the 55,566 records in scope. That leaves nearly three-quarters of the field distributed across a long tail of 100 ranked companies and many smaller filers, so a single-leader dominance narrative overstates how concentrated the rest of the field actually is.
Filings rose from 871 in 2017 to a peak of 1,162 in 2021, then fell to 684 by 2024 — a 41% decline over that three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year the dataset treats as complete; because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the lower-looking 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in and should not be read as an ongoing collapse. The honest read is a pullback from a 2021 peak, not a settled downward trend.
A61B, covering diagnosis and surgery apparatus, appears in 14.6% of all 55,566 records, making it the single densest class by a wide margin. G16H healthcare informatics (6.8%) and A61M body-fluid devices (6.4%) follow well behind. Because a record can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% of records and should be read as density indicators for each class independently, not as parts of a whole.
The smaller IPC classes in this dataset — implant structures (A61F, 2.5%), image data processing (G06T, 2.7%) and sterilising/disinfecting equipment (A61L, 2.9%) — show meaningfully lower filing density than the dominant A61B and G16H clusters. Sub-areas that combine two of these lower-density classes, such as sensing-integrated implants or sterilisation-cycle informatics, are worth a closer prior-art search before assuming the space is occupied. Lower density is not proof of an open path, but it does mean fewer competing claims to search around.
The most-cited record in scope is a filing on local in-device memory for electrically powered medical equipment, with 2,808 citations, followed by a limited-use medical probe patent at 2,368. These counts accumulate over the life of a corpus, so older records are structurally favoured over newer ones regardless of current commercial relevance. Treat high citation counts as a marker of historical influence on later filings, not as a signal of which patents matter most today.
Research Medical Equipment Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole medical equipment patent landscape 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.