Rotator Cuff Repair Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
Rotator Cuff Repair Construct Patents: Filing Concentration and Open Claim Space
52.4% of all 340 records sit with the top five assignees, so most competitive activity is already staked out by a small group of filers. Filings peaked in 2017 at 46 records, then fell before rebuilding to 20 records in 2024 — a +233% increase from the 6 filed in 2021. Treat 2025 and 2026 as incomplete given the roughly 18-month publication lag.
- 1MEDOS INT SARL78
- 2ARTHREX INC35
- 3THE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUND34
- 4ARTHROCARE CORP17
- 5ORTHONOBLE14
See the full rotator cuff repair constructs analysis in Eureka
- The complete ranking, not just the top five
- Every IPC branch with its share of the corpus
- The most-cited records, and where claim space is still thin
Common questions on rotator cuff repair construct patents
Who holds the most patents on rotator cuff repair constructs?
Filing activity is concentrated: the leading assignee holds 78 of the 340 records in scope, and the top five assignees together hold 52.4% of all records. The drop from fifth to tenth place is gradual rather than steep, meaning several mid-tier competitors are filing at a broadly similar pace just behind the leaders. A freedom-to-operate review should treat the top five as the primary blocking risk rather than assuming a single dominant holder.
Is patent filing on rotator cuff repair constructs increasing or slowing down?
Filings rose from 6 records in 2021 to 20 in 2024, a +233% increase over that span, indicating renewed rather than declining interest. The overall trend peaked earlier, in 2017, at 46 records, then dipped before rebuilding. Counts for 2025 and 2026 appear lower in the raw data but should not be read as a slowdown, since publication typically lags filing by around 18 months and those years are still filling in.
What technology areas are under-claimed in rotator cuff repair constructs?
Surgical technique and implant claims dominate, with A61B covering 73.5% of the 340 records and A61F covering 31.2%. By contrast, textile-oriented classes — woven fabrics, braiding, filament and trimmings — each account for 3.5% or less of records. That gap suggests augmentation-patch material science and fibre architecture carry comparatively less claim density than the surgical mechanics around them.
Disclaimer. This analysis is based on Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent records and is provided for general information and reference only. Patent data carries inherent limitations — recent filings are under-counted because of publication lag, counts may be on a record or family basis, classification and applicant-name data may contain errors or duplicates, and the underlying search query defines the scope shown — so the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing here is an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Verify independently and review with qualified patent and legal professionals before acting on it.
Method: Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Rotator Cuff Repair Constructs covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish. Every share divides by all records in scope. Data: Patsnap Eureka. See the full landscape report.