Neurovascular Access Systems Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
- 29.5% concentration at the top. The five leading assignees account for 1,111 of 3,771 records in scope — a real lead, but not a lock on the field.
- Filings peaked in 2020 at 335. Volume has since pulled back, with 2021's 267 filings down 51% to 132 by 2024, the last year the data can treat as complete.
- A61B and A61M dominate the claim space. 66.7% and 50.4% of records respectively sit in diagnosis/surgery and body-fluid device classes, leaving sterilising, electrotherapy and materials-testing classes thin by comparison.
Filing growth compares 2021 (267 records) with 2024 (132) — 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 3,771 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Neurovascular access systems are the catheters, sheaths and guide devices used to reach intracranial and cervical vessels during stroke thrombectomy and related procedures. This landscape covers 3,771 published records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026, indexed against claim language covering balloon guide catheters, access sheaths, tortuous-anatomy navigation and device compatibility. The scope is deliberately narrow: it isolates access and delivery hardware from the therapeutic devices — stents, coils, valves — that these systems are built to carry.
Because the search string combines access-device terms with functional claim language like proximal flow arrest and catheter trackability, the corpus skews toward mechanical and procedural claims rather than materials science. Readers should treat family counts, not raw document counts, as the fairer measure of real invention density where continuations or multi-jurisdiction filing inflate a single filer's numbers.
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
Two views of the same 3,771-record corpus: the pace of filing over time, and how those records distribute across IPC subclasses. Both are read against the same denominator, so shares in the composition chart add up to more than 100% because a single record can carry several classes.
Filings rose to a 2020 peak, then eased back
Annual filings ran from 161 in 2017 to a peak of 335 in 2020. The three-year span from 2021 (267) to 2024 (132) — the most recent year the dataset can treat as complete — shows a 51% decline. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in and should not be read as a continuation of that decline.
A61B and A61M carry two-thirds and one-half of the field
A61B (diagnosis and surgery) appears in 66.7% of records and A61M (devices for body fluids) in 50.4%, reflecting the corpus's focus on delivery mechanics. A61F (implants and prostheses) sits at 34.7%, while A61L, A61N, A61K, G01N and B29C are each under 4% — thin enough that a well-drafted claim in sterilisation compatibility or materials testing has comparatively little prior art to work around.
Shares are the percentage of the 3,771 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Neurovascular Access Systems with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about neurovascular access systems and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records and a representative filing
US10471233B2 — Methods and systems for treatment of acute ischemic stroke
A system of devices for treating an artery includes an arterial access sheath adapted to introduce an interventional catheter into an artery and an elongated dilator positionable within the internal lumen of the sheath body. The catheter is sized and shaped to be introduced via a carotid artery access site into a common carotid artery through the sheath's internal lumen, with a distal-most section long enough to reach an intracranial artery while the proximal section remains in the common carotid artery.Filed by Route 92 Medical, Inc. and granted 2019-11-12, this record anchors the carotid-to-intracranial access route that much of the surrounding claim activity in this corpus references.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6629534B1 | Methods and apparatus for cardiac valve repair | 1,966 |
| 2 | US7534259B2 | Nonstented heart valves with formed in situ support | 1,455 |
| 3 | US7608091B2 | Methods and apparatus for cardiac valve repair | 1,357 |
| 4 | US20030040772A1 | Delivery devices | 1,279 |
| 5 | US6752813B2 | Methods and devices for capturing and fixing leaflets in valve repair | 1,140 |
| 6 | US9492192B2 | Atherectomy devices, systems, and methods | 1,059 |
| 7 | US20020013571A1 | Methods and devices for capturing and fixing leaflets in valve repair | 958 |
| 8 | US20030040771A1 | Methods for creating woven devices | 933 |
| 9 | US20040039442A1 | Methods and apparatus for cardiac valve repair | 863 |
| 10 | US7320704B2 | Nonstented temporary valve for cardiovascular therapy | 826 |
Citation counts reflect influence within this searched corpus, not current commercial relevance — older records accumulate citations simply by being older, and several of the highest-cited records here relate to valve repair rather than access hardware itself, a reminder that citation networks cross into adjacent device categories.
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 means for filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once the raw counts are set against their proper denominators: where the field concentrates, how fast it moved, and where claim density is thin.
Leadership is real but not exclusive
The top five assignees hold 29.5% of all records in scope, and the top ten hold 41.2%. That leaves a majority of the corpus — well over half — distributed across a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants, which is unusual for a field this procedurally mature.
Volume has cooled from its 2020 peak
Filings peaked at 335 in 2020 and fell from 267 in 2021 to 132 by 2024 — a 51% decline over the only three-year span the dataset can treat as complete. That is a genuine pullback in new filing activity, not evidence that the underlying technology has stopped moving.
Delivery mechanics are the densest ground
A61B and A61M together cover the bulk of the field's claim language, meaning access-sheath and catheter-trackability mechanics are the most contested territory. Sterilisation (A61L), electrotherapy integration (A61N) and materials testing (G01N) each sit under 4%, marking them as comparatively open.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to neurovascular access systems, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and what is still uncovered
The ranked list of 100 assignees shows a small group of device makers with sustained filing programmes alongside many single- or few-filing entrants — a pattern typical of a field where core mechanics are settled but procedural refinements keep generating new claims.
Even active filers are pulling back
Assignees with meaningful recent-year volume are showing sharp year-over-year declines rather than acceleration, which is consistent with the broader 2021–2024 pullback rather than any single company exiting the space.
Collaboration is limited and concentrated
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear across the corpus, and the strongest of these cluster around a single pairing of organisations, suggesting most patent activity in this field is pursued independently rather than through joint filing arrangements.
Sterilisation and materials claims are thin
A61L, A61N and G01N each cover under 4% of records, despite sitting directly adjacent to the dense A61B/A61M core. A first claim tying access-device geometry to a sterilisation-compatible material property, or to an integrated sensing/testing function, would face comparatively little prior art.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Route 92 Medical, Inc. | 6 | -65% |
| Imperative Care, Inc. | 1 | -94% |
| Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. | 1 | -93% |
| Cianna Medical, Inc. | 1 | — |
| Silk Road Medical, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Covidien LP | 0 | -100% |
| Neuravi Limited | 0 | -100% |
| Evalve, Inc. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The patterns above point to specific next questions rather than a single conclusion. Each depends on drilling into claim language the summary tables don't show.
Check freedom-to-operate in the thin classes
Before drafting in sterilisation, electrotherapy or materials-testing claim space, pull the actual claim scope of the small number of existing filings there rather than relying on the class share alone.
Explore in Eureka →Track the long tail, not just the leaders
With over half of records held outside the ranked leaders, monitoring new entrants matters as much as watching the top assignees for freedom-to-operate purposes.
Explore in Eureka →Re-run the trend once 2025–2026 data settles
The apparent 2021–2024 decline is real, but the most recent two years are still filling in under normal publication lag and should be revisited before drawing conclusions about current filing pace.
Explore in Eureka →Common questions about this landscape
The ranked list in this dataset covers 100 assignees, with the leader holding 319 records and the fifth-place holder 111. The top five combined account for 29.5% of all 3,771 records in scope, and the top ten account for 41.2%. That still leaves a majority of the field spread across companies and inventors outside the ranked leaders, so leadership in this space is meaningful but not exclusive.
Filings peaked in 2020 at 335 and fell from 267 in 2021 to 132 in 2024, a 51% decline over that span — the most recent three-year period the dataset can treat as complete. Publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so 2025 and 2026 counts are still incomplete and should not be read as continuing the same slope. The honest read is a real pullback in filing volume through 2024, not a verdict on where filing stands today.
A61B, covering diagnosis and surgery devices, appears in 66.7% of the 3,771 records in scope, and A61M, covering devices for body fluids, appears in 50.4%. A61F, implants and prostheses, sits at 34.7%. Sterilisation, electrotherapy, medicinal preparations, materials testing and plastics-shaping classes each cover under 4% of records, marking them as comparatively under-claimed relative to the delivery-mechanics core.
US10471233B2, assigned to Route 92 Medical and granted in November 2019, claims a system combining an arterial access sheath, an elongated dilator positioned within that sheath, and a catheter sized to travel from a carotid artery access site into an intracranial artery while its proximal section remains in the common carotid artery. It is a representative record for the carotid-to-intracranial access route rather than an outlier design, and its claim structure — access sheath plus dilator plus a length-matched catheter — recurs across much of the surrounding corpus. Anyone designing a similar carotid-access delivery system should review its specific length and diameter limitations directly rather than relying on this summary.
The composition data points to three adjacent but thinly covered classes: sterilisation and disinfecting (A61L, 3.7% of records), electrotherapy integration (A61N, 2.0%), and materials analysis or testing (G01N, 0.8%). Each sits next to the dense A61B/A61M core but carries far less claim coverage, which suggests room for claims that tie access-device geometry to sterilisation-compatible materials or integrated sensing functions. A proper freedom-to-operate search in these specific classes is still necessary before filing, since low density is not the same as zero coverage.
Research Neurovascular Access Systems in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole neurovascular access systems 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.