Robotic Endovascular Catheter Systems Patents: Top Companies 2026
- 85.3% concentration. The top five assignees together hold 279 of the 327 records in scope, a filing pattern that leaves little room for a new entrant to build a broad platform claim.
- Filing has cooled since its 2020 peak. Activity ran 19 records in 2020 and dropped from 10 in 2021 to 4 in 2024, a -60% move over that span; 2025-2026 figures are still filling in as publication catches up to filing.
- Two IPC classes carry almost all the volume. A61B (diagnosis & surgery) and A61M (body-fluid devices) cover 79.5% and 65.1% of records respectively, while robotics-specific class B25J sits at just 2.1%.
Filing growth compares 2021 (10 records) with 2024 (4) — 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 327 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the patent record shows about robotic endovascular catheters
Robotic endovascular catheter systems sit at the intersection of interventional cardiology and teleoperated robotics: a controller and master input device drive a flexible, steerable instrument through a patient’s vasculature, replacing a physician’s hand-manipulation of the catheter at the table. The 327 records captured here span 2015 through mid-2026 and cluster heavily around instrument-driver mechanics, motion control and procedural workflow claims rather than novel robotic hardware architectures. Filing is dominated by a small number of assignees whose early platform patents still anchor the most-cited prior art in the field.
The picture that emerges is one of an established core technology with mature IP already staked out by a handful of firms, a slowing but not dormant filing pace, and technology classes that show most activity concentrated in surgical and fluid-device categories rather than in general robotics or informatics classifications.
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 classification
Two views of the same 327-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims fall under.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings peaked at 19 records in 2020, then declined from 10 in 2021 to 4 in 2024 (-60% over that span). 2025 and 2026 figures are understated because publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months, so recent-year totals should not be read as a continued decline until later data cuts confirm it.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
A61B (diagnosis & surgery) and A61M (devices for body fluids) dominate at 79.5% and 65.1% of the 327 records respectively. Robotics-specific classification B25J appears in only 2.1% of records, and adjacent classes covering implants, digital processing, additive manufacturing and connectivity each sit below 2%, indicating that most claims are drafted as surgical or fluid-device inventions rather than as general robotics or software inventions.
Shares are the percentage of the 327 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Robotic Endovascular Catheter Systems with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about robotic endovascular catheter systems and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe patents every new entrant has to design around
US20060293643A1 — Robotic catheter system
A robotic catheter system includes a controller with a master input device, and an instrument driver in communication with the controller, the instrument driver configured for independently controlling each of a number of desired motions of a flexible, elongate guide instrument in a body of a patient in response to control signals generated by the controller, the desired motions selected from the group comprising axial advancement, axial retraction, axial rotation, and radial bending. Integrated haptics capability may be provided, in which one or more motors provide tactile feedback to an operator through the master input device.Filed by Auris Health, this is one of the earliest broad instrument-driver claims in the dataset and sits upstream of much of the later filing activity from the same assignee family.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US7850642B2 | Methods using a robotic catheter system | 1,769 |
| 2 | US7972298B2 | Robotic catheter system | 1,669 |
| 3 | US8052636B2 | Robotic catheter system and methods | 1,450 |
| 4 | US8190238B2 | Robotic catheter system and methods | 1,083 |
| 5 | US8498691B2 | Robotic catheter system and methods | 915 |
| 6 | US20070043338A1 | Robotic catheter system and methods | 883 |
| 7 | WO2005087128A1 | Robotic catheter system | 800 |
| 8 | US20070197896A1 | Robotic catheter system and methods | 774 |
| 9 | US20100069833A1 | Catheter system | 753 |
| 10 | US20050222554A1 | Robotic catheter system | 671 |
Citation counts favour older filings by construction — a patent published in 2010 has had far more years to accumulate citations than one published in 2023 — so treat this table as a map of influence, not of current commercial importance.
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 concentration and filing pattern mean for strategy
Three figures from the dataset carry direct implications for anyone deciding where to file, litigate or license in this space.
The core platform claims are already spoken for
With 279 of 327 records concentrated among five assignees, a new entrant attempting a broad instrument-driver or master-controller claim is filing directly into occupied territory. The practical opening is narrower, more specific claims — particular motion-control algorithms, specific compatibility features, or workflow steps not already covered.
Activity has cooled from its 2020 peak
Filings dropped from 10 in 2021 to 4 in 2024, continuing down from a peak of 19 in 2020. This does not necessarily mean the field is closing — recent years are always undercounted due to publication lag — but the multi-year decline through the last complete year is real and worth watching against future data cuts.
Claims are drafted as surgical devices, not robotics
Despite the robotic framing of the field, the overwhelming majority of claims sit in A61B and A61M — surgical and fluid-device classifications — while dedicated robotics classification B25J covers only 7 of 327 records. This suggests examiners and applicants alike treat these as medical device inventions first.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to robotic endovascular catheter systems, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the ground, and where it is thin
The ranked leaders account for all 327 records between them, but the distribution inside that ranking is steep: a small group holds the bulk of the volume while a long tail files once or twice.
One filer holds nearly a third of the field
The top-ranked assignee's 93 records outweigh the combined total of the sixth through tenth-ranked filers, reflecting an early and sustained investment in instrument-driver and controller patents that other assignees have had to file around rather than through.
Most of the ranking is single or low-volume filers
Fifth place holds 40 records and tenth place holds only 6, showing a steep drop-off outside the leading group. The remaining ranked assignees below tenth place file in small numbers, often around a specific compatibility feature or workflow step rather than a broad platform.
Recent-year activity has gone quiet across the board
Multiple assignees that filed steadily in earlier years show zero records in the latest year, including one with a -100% year-on-year change. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this is as likely to reflect incomplete recent data as an actual halt in R&D.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Corindus, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Auris Health, Inc. | 0 | — |
| St. Jude Medical, Atrial Fibrillation Division, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| KIRSCHENMAN MARK B | 0 | — |
| WENDEROW TAL | 0 | — |
| STAHLER GREGORY J | 0 | — |
| MURPHY JOHN | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with occupied core claims and thinner coverage at the edges. The next steps depend on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing, or new filing.
Map claims against the leading five assignees
Before drafting a new application, run a claim-by-claim comparison against the patents held by the top five assignees, who together cover 85.3% of the 327 records in scope.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaWatch the under-claimed branches
Sub-areas like device-compatibility sensing and workflow automation show thin coverage relative to the core instrument-driver claims — these are the more realistic places to build a defensible position.
Track white space in EurekaRecheck the 2025-2026 trend once data settles
The apparent decline in filings partly reflects publication lag; revisit the trend line in a future data cut before concluding the field is contracting.
Set a monitoring alert in EurekaCommon questions about this patent landscape
One assignee leads the ranked field with 93 of the 327 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-ranked assignee at 40 records. Together the top five assignees hold 279 records, or 85.3% of the total, meaning ownership of the core technology is highly concentrated rather than spread across many small filers. This concentration is largely built on early instrument-driver and master-controller patents that later filings, including from other assignees, have had to work around.
Filing peaked at 19 records in 2020 and declined to 4 by 2024, a -60% drop over that three-year window. However, patent publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the 2025 and 2026 figures in this dataset are still incomplete and should not be read as confirmation of a continued decline. The safest reading through the last complete year, 2024, is that filing activity has genuinely slowed from its 2020 peak.
This filing, assigned to Auris Health, claims a robotic catheter system with a controller, a master input device, and an instrument driver capable of independently controlling axial advancement, retraction, rotation and radial bending of a flexible guide instrument, with optional haptic feedback. It is one of the earlier broad instrument-driver claims in the dataset and sits upstream of much of the later filing activity from the same assignee lineage. A new entrant building a general-purpose master-slave catheter controller with these four motion primitives and haptic feedback would need to review this filing closely, though narrower or differently structured control claims may sit outside its scope.
Classification data shows claims concentrated overwhelmingly in surgical (A61B, 79.5% of records) and fluid-device (A61M, 65.1%) categories, while robotics-specific classification B25J appears in only 2.1% of records and classes covering digital processing, additive manufacturing, healthcare informatics and wireless transmission each sit at or below 1.2%. Sub-areas tied to these thinner classes, such as device-compatibility sensing, sterile draping workflow, and procedure-time optimisation controls, show comparatively low filing density relative to the size of the core field. That does not guarantee they are unclaimed, but it does suggest a smaller body of prior art to search and design around.
The United States accounts for the largest share of receiving-office filings at 196, followed by the European Patent Office at 71 and WIPO PCT filings at 39. Smaller volumes appear at the Austrian patent office (11), India (6) and Germany (2). This distribution points to the US as the primary market for enforcement and freedom-to-operate analysis, with Europe as a secondary but still substantial filing venue.
Research Robotic Endovascular Catheter Systems in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole robotic endovascular catheter 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.