Neurostimulation Devices Patent Landscape 2026
Neurostimulation Devices Patent Landscape in 2026
The neurostimulation devices field is a heavily concentrated, mature arena in which Medtronic and Boston Scientific Neuromodulation together account for the dominant share of the hundred largest filers’ combined output. Annual volume peaked in 2022 and has since eased, signaling a field transitioning from rapid expansion toward consolidation and incremental differentiation.
Medtronic and Boston Scientific lead a highly concentrated field
The neurostimulation devices landscape is dominated by two incumbents: Medtronic and Boston Scientific Neuromodulation hold the top two positions, with Medtronic at 8,074 patent records and Boston Scientific Neuromodulation at 7,894 patent records — the closest first-to-second gap among any major medical-device segment.
The top five filers collectively account for 54% of the hundred largest filers’ combined total, a concentration level that signals high barriers to displacing established leaders through volume alone. Cardiac Pacemakers ranks third at 2,513 patent records, already less than a third of the leader’s count, indicating a pronounced two-tier structure.
| # | Applicant | Patent records | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Medtronic Inc | 8,074 | |
| 2 | Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation | 7,894 | |
| 3 | Cardiac Pacemakers Inc | 2,513 | |
| 4 | Advanced Neuromodulation Systems Inc | 1,386 | |
| 5 | Pacesetter Inc | 1,099 | |
| 6 | Nevro Corp | 888 | |
| 7 | Regents of the University of California | 868 | |
| 8 | Saluda Medical Pty Ltd | 605 | |
| 9 | LivaNova USA Inc | 576 | |
| 10 | BIOTRONIK SE & CO KG | 561 |
| # | Applicant | Patent records | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | LivaNova PLC | 554 | |
| 12 | ElectroCore Inc | 514 | |
| 13 | Nyxoah | 405 | |
| 14 | The Cleveland Clinic Foundation | 376 | |
| 15 | Cirtec Medical Corp | 365 | |
| 16 | Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL) | 362 | |
| 17 | The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University | 358 | |
| 18 | Duke University | 355 | |
| 19 | Axonics Inc | 333 | |
| 20 | Sceneray | 320 |
The depth of Medtronic’s and Boston Scientific’s portfolios — both anchored in core electrotherapy (A61N) and overlapping into surgical diagnostics (A61B) and healthcare informatics (G16H) — means new entrants must differentiate on technology route, indication, or geography rather than competing head-on in established stimulation modalities.
Counts for the most recent 18–24 months are subject to publication lag and likely understate actual activity; apparent softness in 2024–2026 data should not be interpreted as a structural retreat. Longer-window growth, applicant concentration, and technology-route coverage are therefore more reliable signals than the latest-year bar alone.
Activity peaked in 2022; electrotherapy dominates the technology mix
Two charts together reveal the field’s maturity: filing volume has pulled back from its 2022 peak while the IPC composition shows a lopsided concentration in core electrotherapy classes, with adjacent informatics and surgical classes representing a smaller but growing fraction.
Annual filing trend
Annual filings climbed from 1,228 in 2017 to a peak of 1,406 in 2022 before easing to 1,090 in 2023 and 916 in 2024. The 2025 and 2026 data points (485 and 28 respectively) reflect publication lag rather than a real collapse and should be read as incomplete. The overall multi-year window recorded a recent-growth figure of –10%, consistent with a field that has passed its peak filing rate but retains substantial ongoing activity.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaTechnology composition
A61N (Electrotherapy and radiation therapy) is overwhelmingly dominant at 19,013 patent records, dwarfing all other classes. A61B (Diagnosis and surgery) is the second branch at 5,872 records, reflecting the growing integration of sensing and closed-loop feedback into stimulation platforms. G16H (Healthcare informatics) at 1,376 records and A61M (Devices for body fluids) at 1,228 records represent emerging adjacencies worth monitoring.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaHighly cited patent families surfaced by the query
Citation-heavy patent families returned by the query. Use this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents.
Systems and methods for coordinating therapies
A system may be configured for treating a condition and may include at least one therapy delivery system, at least one event detector and a controller. The therapy delivery system(s) may be configured to deliver at least two therapies to at least two therapy targets including deliver a first therapy to a first therapy target and deliver a second therapy to… (excerpt from the patent abstract)
| # | Patent | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rechargeable spinal cord stimulator system | 3,865 |
| 2 | Rechargeable spinal cord stimulator system | 1,664 |
| 3 | Vagal nerve stimulation techniques for treatment o… | 1,226 |
| 4 | Positioning system for neurological procedures in … | 1,217 |
| 5 | Modulated high frequency tissue modification | 1,198 |
| 6 | Adaptive brain stimulation method and system | 1,171 |
| 7 | Apparatus and method for treating peripheral vascu… | 1,065 |
| 8 | Implantable pulse generators using rechargeable ze… | 1,026 |
Ranked by total forward citations. Citation counts favour older and broadly cited patent families, and broad or adjacent patents may appear when they match the search scope. Treat this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents.
What the portfolio structure means for R&D strategy
The combination of a past-peak filing curve, extreme leader concentration, active academic co-filing, and US-heavy jurisdiction coverage shapes where incremental R&D investment is most and least likely to find defensible white space.
Field is past its 2022 peak — consolidation phase
The lifecycle stage is Decline, with annual filings easing back from the 2022 peak of 1,406. This does not indicate an exit from innovation; it signals that core electrostimulation technology is mature and incremental patents face a crowded prior-art landscape. R&D investment should prioritize differentiated indications or novel delivery mechanisms where the art is thinner.
Past-peak · 2022 apexTwo-player duopoly at the top; tier-two gap is wide
Medtronic (8,074 records) and Boston Scientific Neuromodulation (7,894 records) are nearly matched at the summit, while third-ranked Cardiac Pacemakers (2,513 records) sits at roughly 31% of the leader’s count. The top-five filers hold 54% of the hundred largest filers’ combined output. New entrants face a formidable prior-art wall in mainstream spinal cord and vagal nerve stimulation; niche indication strategies offer a more realistic entry path.
High concentration · duopolyAcademic co-filing is active; Regents of UC is the hub
The Regents of the University of California is the most active co-filer, appearing in the top four collaboration pairs: 51 co-filed records with NeurσSigma, 35 with the US Department of Veterans Affairs, 16 with the University of Louisville Research Foundation, and 16 with Caltech. Boston Scientific Neuromodulation co-files actively with Surgical Theater (22 records) and MRI Interventions (15 records). These partnerships signal that academic-industry bridging remains a key mechanism for innovation at the boundary of neuromodulation and surgical planning.
Academic-industry co-filingUS-centric filing; EPO and PCT remain secondary
The United States accounts for the largest share of patent records at 11,313, followed by Europe via EPO at 3,701 and WIPO PCT filings at 2,749. Australia is a notable fourth at 1,492, likely reflecting Saluda Medical’s home-market filings. Canada (617 records) is the only other jurisdiction with meaningful volume. The absence of significant Asian jurisdiction filings in this corpus suggests either strategic gaps or a corpus scope that under-represents Asian applicants — worth investigating before assuming market freedom-to-operate in those regions.
US-dominant · EPO secondaryGo beyond the landscape: Eureka’s TRIZ Solution agent breaks down an R&D problem and returns patented concept solutions, each with a technical approach and cited patent & literature evidence.
| Applicant | Collaborator | Co-filings |
|---|---|---|
| Regents of the University of California | NeurσSigma Inc | 51 |
| Regents of the University of California | US Department of Veterans Affairs | 35 |
| Cyberonics Inc | EAST TENNESSEE STATE UNIV | 24 |
| Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation | Surgical Theater Inc | 22 |
| Regents of the University of California | University of Louisville Research Foundation Inc | 16 |
| Regents of the University of California | California Institute of Technology | 16 |
| Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation | MRI Interventions Inc | 15 |
| Cyberonics Inc | Flint Hills Scientific LLC | 12 |
| Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation | Augusta University Research Institute Inc | 10 |
| Cardiac Pacemakers Inc | Duke University | 10 |
Co-filing pairs, ranked by the number of jointly-filed patent families.
Boston Scientific gaining ground on Medtronic; both anchored in A61N
The two leaders share nearly identical technology profiles — electrotherapy (A61N 1) as the primary focus, surgical diagnostics (A61B 5) as secondary, and healthcare informatics (G16H) as a growing tertiary — but their filing momentum is diverging sharply.
Medtronic
Medtronic leads the corpus at 8,074 patent records, concentrated in A61N 1 (3,159 records), A61B 5 (869 records), and G16H 20 (185 records). However, recent filing momentum is negative at –26%, indicating the company is allowing its filing rate to taper — consistent with portfolio optimization in a maturing field rather than strategic retreat. Competitors closing the gap should be monitored.
patent records: 8,074Boston Scientific Neuromodulation
Boston Scientific Neuromodulation is the closest challenger at 7,894 patent records and is the only top-two player with positive recent filing momentum at +18%, narrowing Medtronic’s lead. Its technology mix mirrors Medtronic’s — A61N 1 (3,986 records), A61B 5 (560 records), G16H 20 (205 records) — but with a slightly higher emphasis on electrotherapy relative to diagnostics. At the current trajectory, the filing gap between the two leaders is narrowing.
patent records: 7,894| Applicant | Recent (3 yrs) | Trend |
|---|---|---|
| Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation | 814 | ▲ +18% |
| Medtronic | 419 | ▼ -26% |
| Advanced Neuromodulation Systems Inc | 256 | ▬ -2% |
| ElectroCore Inc | 61 | ▼ -38% |
| Cardiac Pacemakers Inc | 6 | ▼ -78% |
| Regents of the University of California | 60 | ▲ +36% |
| Saluda Medical Pty Ltd | 111 | ▲ +21% |
| Duke University | 15 | ▼ -53% |
Under-served adjacent branches in informatics, drug delivery, and implants
Five IPC classes adjacent to the dominant A61N core each account for 4% or less of the corpus, representing areas where the neurostimulation patent art is relatively sparse. Two stand out for their plausible technical value and realistic entry path given existing industry capabilities.
G16H · Healthcare informatics
With 1,376 patent records and a 4% share of the corpus, healthcare informatics is the largest under-served adjacent branch. Closed-loop neurostimulation systems increasingly depend on real-time patient data processing, remote monitoring, and AI-guided parameter adjustment — all squarely within G16H scope. The entry path is realistic for software-capable medical device firms or digital health companies with existing FDA regulatory experience, and the University of California–NeurσSigma collaboration already points in this direction.
Search this in Eureka →A61F · Implants & prostheses
A61F accounts for 312 patent records and just 1% of the corpus, yet the integration of neurostimulation with structural implants — such as spinal implants with embedded electrodes or cochlear and retinal prostheses — represents a technically plausible convergence. The sparse coverage relative to the core A61N class suggests that cross-disciplinary innovation bridging device mechanics and stimulation delivery is not yet heavily contested, offering a differentiated portfolio position for orthopedic or ENT device manufacturers with stimulation know-how.
Search this in Eureka →How leaders differ by technology route across A61N, A61B, and G16H
Strength of each leader across the main technology routes.
| Player | A61N 1 · Electrotherapy & radiation therapy | A61B 5 · Diagnosis & surgery | G16H 20 · Healthcare informatics | G16H 40 · Healthcare informatics | A61N 2 · Electrotherapy & radiation therapy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation | Strong · 3,986 | Emerging · 560 | Emerging · 205 | Emerging · 198 | Absent |
| Medtronic | Strong · 3,159 | Moderate · 869 | Emerging · 185 | Emerging · 136 | Absent |
| Advanced Neuromodulation Systems Inc | Strong · 756 | Emerging · 143 | Emerging · 60 | Emerging · 129 | Emerging · 12 |
| ElectroCore Inc | Strong · 391 | Absent | Emerging · 15 | Emerging · 15 | Moderate · 148 |
| Cardiac Pacemakers Inc | Strong · 370 | Moderate · 103 | Absent | Absent | Absent |
| Saluda Medical Pty Ltd | Strong · 257 | Strong · 185 | Absent | Absent | Absent |
Frequently asked questions
The analysis covers 10,041 patent families in scope globally, drawing on filings from 2017 through 2026, with the most recent period subject to publication lag.
Medtronic leads with 8,074 patent records, followed very closely by Boston Scientific Neuromodulation at 7,894 patent records. Cardiac Pacemakers ranks third at 2,513 patent records, with a substantial gap to the top two. The top five filers account for 54% of the hundred largest filers’ combined total.
Annual filings peaked at 1,406 in 2022 and have since eased. The recent-window growth figure is –10%, and the lifecycle stage is assessed as Decline, meaning the field has passed its peak annual filing rate. Data for 2024–2026 is incomplete due to publication lag and understates actual recent activity.
A61N (Electrotherapy and radiation therapy) is overwhelmingly dominant at 19,013 patent records. A61B (Diagnosis and surgery) is a strong secondary branch at 5,872 records, reflecting the rise of closed-loop and sensing-integrated devices. G16H (Healthcare informatics) at 1,376 records and A61M at 1,228 records are the leading adjacent classes.
The United States is the primary filing jurisdiction at 11,313 patent records, followed by Europe via EPO at 3,701 records and WIPO PCT at 2,749 records. Australia ranks fourth at 1,492 records, with Canada at 617 records. Filing activity in Asian jurisdictions is not prominently represented in this corpus.
The Regents of the University of California is the most prolific co-filer, with 51 co-filed records alongside NeurσSigma, 35 with the US Department of Veterans Affairs, 16 each with the University of Louisville Research Foundation and Caltech. Boston Scientific Neuromodulation co-files with Surgical Theater (22 records) and MRI Interventions (15 records), while Cyberonics co-files with Flint Hills Scientific (12 records).
Map your own neurostimulation patent landscape in minutes
Join 18,000+ innovators using PatSnap Eureka to map any technology landscape: search 2B+ patents and papers, surface key assignees, and generate a report like this in minutes.
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.