Pacemaker Safety MRI-Conditional Patent Snapshot
This is an extremely narrow corpus — 4 patent families in scope — dominated entirely by a single applicant, Pacesetter Inc, with all filings concentrated in the United States. Activity peaked in 2018 and has since eased, signalling a field in decline within this specific search boundary.
Pacesetter Inc holds the entire corpus; no competing filers are present
Within the 4 patent families in scope, Pacesetter Inc is the sole ranked applicant, accounting for every family identified. No second-tier or challenger filer appears in the ranking.
Concentration is absolute: the top five filers’ share of the ranked applicants visible in this query stands at 100%, reflecting the absence of any other applicant in this corpus. This is unusual even for highly specialised medical-device niches and most likely reflects the narrow search boundary rather than the full commercial evidence snapshot.
| # | Applicant | Patent families | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pacesetter Inc | 4 |
Pacesetter Inc’s undivided position suggests either a proprietary niche with high barriers to replication, or that the broader MRI-conditional pacemaker evidence snapshot is captured under different classification or search terms not covered here. Engineers considering entry should extend the search scope before drawing strategic conclusions.
The most recent two years are subject to patent-publication lag, so the absence of post-2021 families should be interpreted cautiously. The corpus of 4 patent families is too small to support robust trend inference. Longer-window growth, applicant concentration, and technology-route coverage are therefore more reliable signals than the latest-year bar alone.
Sporadic filings peaked in 2018; technology is anchored in electrotherapy
Two charts illustrate the filing cadence across 2017–2026 and the IPC branch composition of the 4 families in scope. Both should be read in the context of the very small corpus size.
Annual filing trend
Families appeared in two discrete cohorts — 2018 and 2021 — with no activity recorded in any other year of the window. The lifecycle evidence flags annual volume as having eased from its 2018 peak. Given that the entire corpus is 4 families, this pattern reflects individual filing events rather than a sustained programme, and no trend inference about the broader MRI-conditional pacemaker market should be drawn from this alone.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaTechnology composition
All 4 families carry the A61N (electrotherapy and radiation therapy) classification, confirming the core pacemaker-stimulation framing. Secondary coverage in A61B (diagnosis and surgery) and A61M (devices for body fluids) adds catheter-delivery and fluid-management context, consistent with leadless or catheter-delivered pacemaker technology.
↗ 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.
Catheter-based delivery system for delivering a le…
Disclosed herein is a delivery system for delivering a leadless pacemaker. The delivery system may include a catheter, which may be a guide catheter. The catheter includes a distal end, a proximal end opposite the distal end, a lumen extending between the distal end and the proximal end, and a locking hub operably coupled to the proximal end. The locking… (excerpt from the patent abstract)
| # | Patent | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Catheter-based delivery system for delivering a le… | 20 |
| 2 | Catheter-based delivery system for delivering a le… | 1 |
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.
Assignee snapshot from the current evidence set
The applicants below are visible in this query result. Because the evidence set is relatively small, read this section as a directional snapshot rather than a full competitive ranking.
Pacesetter Inc
Pacesetter Inc holds all 4 patent families in scope, with technology emphasis on A61N 1 (electrotherapy and radiation therapy, 4 families), supplemented by A61B 17 (diagnosis and surgery) and A61M 25 (devices for body fluids). Applicant momentum data is not available for this corpus, consistent with no recorded filings after 2021. Pacesetter Inc is a subsidiary of Abbott (formerly St. Jude Medical), context that is relevant when assessing its position within the broader cardiac device landscape.
patent families: 4No challenger identified
No second applicant appears in the ranking for this corpus. A challenger analysis requires a broader search scope encompassing MRI-conditional pacing, lead design, and implantable pulse generator classifications across the major cardiac device manufacturers.
patent families: N/AFrequently asked questions
The corpus covers 4 patent families. This is an unusually small count for a commercially active medical-device area and most likely reflects a narrow search boundary rather than the full extent of industry patenting in MRI-conditional cardiac devices.
Pacesetter Inc is the sole ranked applicant, holding all 4 patent families identified in this search. Pacesetter Inc is a subsidiary of Abbott (formerly St. Jude Medical).
The evidence classifies this field as Decline, with annual filings having eased back from a peak in 2018 and no activity recorded since 2021 within this corpus. The small corpus size means this lifecycle read applies specifically to this search boundary and not necessarily to the broader MRI-conditional pacemaker market.
All 4 patent families in scope are filed in the United States only. No European, PCT, or Asian office extensions are recorded in this corpus, which is notable for a technology with global clinical deployment.
A61N (electrotherapy and radiation therapy) covers all 4 families and is the visible class. A61B (diagnosis and surgery) and A61M (devices for body fluids, primarily catheters) each appear in 2 families as secondary classifications.
No co-applicant relationships are recorded in this corpus. The single-applicant structure means collaboration analysis is not possible from the available evidence; a broader search would be needed to assess ecosystem co-filing in the wider MRI-conditional implantable device space.
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.