Pacemaker Battery Longevity & Energy Harvesting Patent Landscape
This is a heavily concentrated, post-peak field: Medtronic Inc commands an outsized share of the ranked applicant pool, with annual filings having eased significantly from their 2017 peak. Challengers remain small, filing activity is sparse, and adjacent power-harvesting branches (H02J, H02N) represent the clearest areas of relative under-coverage.
Medtronic’s commanding lead defines a highly concentrated competitive field
Medtronic Inc ranks first among all applicants with 81 patent records, placing it well ahead of every other filer in the corpus. The next-ranked applicants — Shiratronics Inc (12 patent records), Incube Labs LLC (10), and Pacesetter Inc (9) — each hold single-digit or low-double-digit positions that individually trail the leader by a wide margin.
The top five filers together account for 87% of the hundred largest filers’ combined total, signalling an extreme concentration of intellectual property in a small cluster of organizations. The tier gap between Medtronic and the remainder of the field is structural rather than transient.
| # | Applicant | Patent records | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Medtronic Inc | 81 | |
| 2 | Shiratronics Inc | 12 | |
| 3 | Incube Labs LLC | 10 | |
| 4 | Pacesetter Inc | 9 | |
| 5 | Syntilla Medical LLC | 4 | |
| 6 | Micardia Corp | 3 | |
| 7 | Cardiac Pacemakers Inc | 2 | |
| 8 | Don Edward Casey | 2 | |
| 9 | Gregory P. Gadson | 1 |
| # | Applicant | Patent records | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | Advanced Neuromodulation Systems Inc | 1 | |
| 11 | Gregory P. Gadson (MS 301) | 1 | |
| 12 | Hakki A. Hadi | 1 | |
| 13 | Hakki A. Hamid | 1 | |
| 14 | Siemens AG | 1 | |
| 15 | Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corp | 1 | |
| 16 | Gregory P. Gadson Esq. | 1 | |
| 17 | Delft University of Technology | 1 | |
| 18 | Siemens-Elema AB | 1 |
Medtronic’s position, reinforced by a broad technology focus spanning electrotherapy (A61N 1), power supply systems (H02J 7), and diagnostic applications (A61B 5), suggests that any new entrant would need to differentiate strongly on sub-class or application angle rather than contest the core electrotherapy space directly.
Filing data from approximately 2024 onward is subject to publication lag and likely understates recent activity; the apparent low volumes in 2024–2026 should not be read as a complete picture of current R&D investment. Longer-window growth, applicant concentration, and technology-route coverage are therefore more reliable signals than the latest-year bar alone.
Annual filings have eased from a 2017 peak while electrotherapy remains the dominant technology branch
Two structural features define the current landscape: a clear multi-year decline in annual filing volumes from a 2017 high, and a technology composition dominated by a single IPC class with small adjacent clusters that remain relatively sparse.
Annual filing trend
Peak annual activity occurred in 2017 (13 patent records) and 2018 (12), with a stepwise decline thereafter. Volumes from 2023 onward reflect only partially published filings due to typical 18-month publication lag, so the post-2022 figures understate actual recent activity and should not be treated as a confirmed floor.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaTechnology composition
A61N (Electrotherapy and radiation therapy) overwhelmingly dominates the technology mix at 135 patent records, reflecting the core implantable device focus of most applicants. Adjacent branches — A61B (Diagnosis and surgery, 10), H02J (Power supply and grid systems, 7), A61M (Devices for body fluids, 3), A61F (Implants and prostheses, 2), and H02N (Electric machines, 2) — are each materially smaller, indicating that energy-harvesting and power-management sub-domains have seen comparatively limited dedicated patent activity.
↗ 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.
Cardiac pacemaker with programmable output pulse a…
An implantable cardiac pacemaker having programmable stimulating pulse amplitudes selectable by means of an external programming unit. The pacemaker includes charge pump circuitry for developing a stimulating pulse voltage on an output capacitor. The output capacitor is charged to a selected level identified by a multiple-bit amplitude value communicated to… (excerpt from the patent abstract)
| # | Patent | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rate responsive pacemaker and methods for optimizi… | 390 |
| 2 | Method and apparatus for monitoring pacemaker inte… | 272 |
| 3 | Pacemaker implant recognition | 250 |
| 4 | Method and apparatus for rate-responsive cardiac p… | 223 |
| 5 | Method and apparatus for automatic pacing threshol… | 212 |
| 6 | Low energy pacing pulse waveform for implantable p… | 192 |
| 7 | Method and apparatus for battery depletion monitor… | 151 |
| 8 | Rate responsive pacemaker and method for automatic… | 143 |
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. Some patent titles may be shown in their original, non-English language where an accurate translation could not be guaranteed.
What the patent structure means for R&D positioning
The combination of post-peak filing volume, extreme applicant concentration, minimal recorded co-filing, and US-centric jurisdiction coverage shapes where new R&D investment can most plausibly find differentiated space.
Field is in decline from a 2017 peak
The lifecycle evidence classifies this field as Decline, with annual filings easing back from the 2017 peak of 13 patent records. This indicates that the primary IP-building phase for conventional pacemaker battery longevity approaches has passed. New entrants should anticipate a mature, well-defended core and orient R&D toward differentiated sub-domains or next-generation harvesting modalities rather than incremental improvements to established approaches.
Lifecycle: DeclineExtreme concentration around a single leader
The top five filers account for 87% of the hundred largest filers’ combined patent records, with Medtronic Inc alone holding 81 patent records — far exceeding any other entity. This concentration implies significant freedom-to-operate risk in the electrotherapy core (A61N 1) and suggests that challengers such as Shiratronics Inc and Incube Labs LLC are pursuing differentiated niches rather than attempting direct competition across the full portfolio.
High concentrationNo co-filing activity recorded in this corpus
The collaboration evidence contains no recorded co-applicant filings in this topic. The absence of joint patents suggests that development in this field has proceeded through independent proprietary programs rather than industry consortia or academic–industry partnerships. Delft University of Technology appears as a sole applicant, but no collaborative filings are evidenced, leaving ecosystem partnership as a potential under-explored strategic avenue.
No co-filing detectedUS-centric protection with selective European and PCT coverage
The United States leads with 68 patent records at the jurisdiction level, followed by Europe (EPO) at 32 and Australia and WIPO (PCT) at 11 each. Canada (8) and the UK (2) account for additional coverage. Germany and Austria show minimal representation (1 and 2 patent records respectively), suggesting that protection strategies outside the US and EPO are selective rather than systematic — a pattern consistent with a market where US regulatory approval drives commercial priority.
US-led geographyGo 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.
Co-filing pairs, ranked by the number of jointly-filed patent families.
Medtronic leads broadly; Shiratronics and Incube Labs represent the active challenger tier
The applicant field divides sharply into one dominant incumbent and a small cluster of significantly smaller challengers, several of whom show new-entrant momentum in recent filing windows.
Medtronic Inc
Medtronic Inc holds 81 patent records, more than six times the next-ranked applicant. Its technology emphasis spans A61N 1 (Electrotherapy and radiation therapy, 83 records), H02J 7 (Power supply and grid systems, 7 records), and A61B 5 (Diagnosis and surgery, 6 records), reflecting a portfolio that covers both core stimulation and power management sub-domains. Recent momentum shows a new-entrant signal in the most recent filing window, though the base is small relative to the accumulated portfolio.
patent records: 81Shiratronics Inc
Shiratronics Inc ranks second with 12 patent records, with technology focus concentrated entirely in A61N 1 (Electrotherapy and radiation therapy). Its recent filing trend is classified as a new entrant, indicating that its activity in this corpus is recent in origin rather than a continuation of a long-standing program. As the most active second-tier filer alongside Incube Labs LLC (10 patent records), it represents the leading edge of challenger activity in a field otherwise dominated by Medtronic.
patent records: 12| Applicant | Recent (3 yrs) | Trend |
|---|---|---|
| Medtronic Inc | 3 | ▲ new entrant |
| Shiratronics Inc | 2 | ▲ new entrant |
Power supply and implant design branches remain under-served relative to the electrotherapy core
Several IPC branches adjacent to the dominant A61N core show materially lower patent-record counts, representing areas where dedicated filing activity has been sparse. Whether these represent viable entry points depends on technical fit and commercial rationale.
H02J · Power Supply & Grid Systems
H02J accounts for 7 patent records against A61N’s 135, a share of approximately 4% of the technology mix. This branch covers power conditioning, wireless charging architectures, and energy storage management — all technically relevant to extending pacemaker battery life or enabling energy-harvesting circuits. The low filing density here, despite direct relevance to the topic, suggests that few applicants have pursued dedicated IP in power-circuit design separate from the implant-level electrotherapy claims. An entrant with expertise in low-power electronics or bioelectronics energy management could find differentiated space in this sub-domain.
Search this in Eureka →H02N · Electric Machines (Other)
H02N holds only 2 patent records in this corpus, representing the sparsest coverage among the identified adjacent branches at a 1% share of the technology mix. This class encompasses piezoelectric, thermoelectric, and kinetic energy conversion mechanisms — precisely the transduction principles most commonly proposed for in-body energy harvesting from cardiac motion, body heat, or blood flow. The near-absence of filings here is an observation of relative sparsity; whether it signals an open technical avenue or simply reflects early-stage research not yet reaching patent filing depends on factors outside this evidence set.
Search this in Eureka →Frequently asked questions
The evidence set contains 45 patent families in scope for this topic. The United States leads at the jurisdiction level with 68 patent records, followed by Europe (EPO) at 32.
Medtronic Inc is the clear leader with 81 patent records, more than six times the next-ranked filer (Shiratronics Inc at 12 patent records). The top five applicants together account for 87% of the hundred largest filers’ combined total, indicating extreme concentration.
No. The lifecycle evidence classifies this field as Decline, with annual filings easing back from a 2017 peak of 13 patent records. Volumes from 2024 onward are subject to publication lag and likely understate the most recent activity, but the multi-year trend is downward from the 2017 high.
H02J (Power supply and grid systems, 7 patent records) and H02N (Electric machines including piezoelectric and thermoelectric conversion, 2 patent records) are the most sparsely covered branches relative to the dominant A61N electrotherapy class (135 patent records). A61F (Implants and prostheses) and A61M (Devices for body fluids) each hold 2–3 patent records.
The collaboration evidence contains no recorded co-applicant filings in this corpus. Development appears to have proceeded through independent proprietary programs without documented industry or academic–industry joint filings.
The most-cited work in the corpus covers rate-responsive pacemaker optimization (390 citations), pacemaker integrity monitoring (272 citations), pacemaker implant recognition (250 citations), automatic pacing threshold methods (212 citations), and battery depletion monitoring (151 citations). These heavily cited works cluster around performance optimization and power management rather than novel energy-harvesting modalities.
Built on Patsnap Open Platform
This report’s underlying patent dataset — filings, assignees, technology clusters — is open for developers via MCP and REST API. Free to start, 10,000 credits, no credit card required.
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.