Skin Substitutes Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 23.3% concentration at the top. The top 5 of 100 ranked assignees hold 247 of 1,062 records in scope, a leader position (84 records) well ahead of a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants.
- Filings cooled after a 2019 peak. Publications rose to 83 in 2019, then filings fell 34% from 2021 (50) to 2024 (33) — the last year publication lag allows a reliable read on.
- Sterilising and disinfecting claims dominate. A61L covers 48.1% of the 1,062 records, ahead of medicinal preparations (40.6%) and genetic engineering/microorganism claims (35.3%).
Filing growth compares 2021 (50 records) with 2024 (33) — 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 1,062 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 1,062 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine skin substitute or bioengineered skin graft claims with dermal matrix, cell seeding, graft take, decellularization, storage condition or reimbursement code language. That search construction captures the clinical and manufacturing mechanics behind a graft — not just the tissue itself — which is why sterilising and disinfecting classifications (A61L) and cell-culture classifications (C12N) both show up heavily alongside medicinal preparation claims (A61K).
Filing activity built through the late 2010s, peaked in 2019, and has since eased — though the two most recent years are still filling in under normal publication lag. Filing sits at a moderate concentration: a leader well ahead of the field, a handful of research universities and hospital systems close behind, and a long tail of entrants with one or two families each.
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 1,062 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
A 2019 peak, then a documented pullback
Publications climbed from 67 in 2017 to a peak of 83 in 2019. The tracked growth figure — a 34% decline from 50 records in 2021 to 33 in 2024 — is the most recent period long enough past filing to read reliably; 2025 and 2026 figures will fill in as publication catches up and should not be read as a continued drop yet.
Sterilising, medicinal and cell-engineering claims lead
A61L (sterilising and disinfecting) appears on 48.1% of the 1,062 records, ahead of A61K (medicinal preparations, 40.6%) and C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering, 35.3%). Implants and prostheses (A61F, 18.0%) and therapeutic activity claims (A61P, 17.5%) trail well behind, while peptide/protein chemistry (C07K), body-fluid devices (A61M) and bioreactor apparatus (C12M) each sit near or under 7% — a record can carry several classes, so these shares add to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,062 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Skin Substitutes and Bioengineered Grafts with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about skin substitutes and bioengineered grafts and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited filings
US20240131230A1 — Acellular skin substitute for breast reconstruction and preparation method therefor
Filed by L&C Bio Co., Ltd. (2024-04-25), this application covers an acellular skin substitute prepared by removing epidermal layers and acellularizing tissue without proteolytic enzymes or surfactants, then cutting it to patient-specific shapes with design software and a CNC machine for breast reconstruction implant coverage.The process claims target surgical time and seroma reduction rather than the graft material itself.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US8784385B2 | Frozen piercing implements and methods for piercing a substrate | 283 |
| 2 | US5800537A | Method and construct for producing graft tissue from an extracellular matrix | 283 |
| 3 | US5716411A | Method of skin regeneration using a collagen-glycosaminoglycan matrix and cultured epithelial autograft | 229 |
| 4 | US5489304A | Method of skin regeneration using a collagen-glycosaminoglycan matrix and cultured epithelial autograft | 193 |
| 5 | US20070021704A1 | Treatment of leg ulcers using placenta derived collagen biofabric | 167 |
| 6 | US20140200511A1 | Systems, devices, and methods for making or administering frozen particles | 150 |
| 7 | US5693332A | Human keratinocytes supported on a hydrophilic membrane and methods of using same to effect wound closure | 146 |
| 8 | US20100152880A1 | Systems, devices, and methods for making or administering frozen particles | 144 |
| 9 | US8256233B2 | Systems, devices, and methods for making or administering frozen particles | 129 |
| 10 | US20140012225A1 | Delivery system | 124 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations inside this corpus; treat them as a signal of influence on later work, not of current commercial relevance.
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 a filing decision
Three patterns worth acting on before drafting new claims in this space.
A clear leader, not a monopoly
The leading assignee holds 84 records against a fifth-place figure of 29 and a tenth-place figure of 23 — a steep drop-off after the top few, then a long tail. That gap suggests freedom to operate exists outside the leader's core claims, but the top 10 together still cover 34.7% of all records, so adjacent filings need clearance checks against more than one player.
Volume has eased from its 2019 peak
Publications peaked at 83 in 2019 and the tracked comparison shows a 34% decline from 50 records in 2021 to 33 in 2024. Because publication lags filing by about 18 months, 2025 and 2026 numbers are still incomplete and should not be read as confirming a continued fall.
Sterilising and disinfecting claims are the densest single subclass
Nearly half of all records touch A61L, ahead of medicinal preparations and cell-engineering classifications. New filings anchored purely in sterilisation or decellularization methods are entering the most contested part of the map; combination claims spanning A61F implant structure or C07K peptide chemistry sit on comparatively lighter density.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to skin substitutes and bioengineered grafts, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux | Universite de Bordeaux | 23 |
| University of Sheffield | Institute of Information Technology, Pakistan | 22 |
| Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux | Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (INSERM) | 21 |
| Universite de Bordeaux | Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (INSERM) | 21 |
| XENOTHERAPEUTICS INC | Xenotherapeutics Inc | 13 |
| XENOTHERAPEUTICS INC | ALEXIS BIO INC | 12 |
| Garnet Biotherapeutics Inc | RAGAGLIA VANESSA | 6 |
| Garnet Biotherapeutics Inc | KOPEN GENE | 6 |
Several of the strongest co-assignee pairs are university-hospital pairings from the same research cluster, pointing to clinical translation partnerships rather than licensing arrangements.
Who is filing, and where the field is open
The ranked leaders are a mix of specialised skin-substitute companies, research universities and hospital systems; recent-year filing has slowed across the assignees with the largest historical portfolios.
One company well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee's 84 records sit far above the fifth-place figure of 29, giving it the deepest single portfolio in the dataset. Recent-year filings from several of the largest historical portfolios, including this leader, register zero in the latest tracked year — consistent with the broader post-2021 pullback rather than a single company's retreat.
Universities and hospital systems hold real share
Academic and hospital assignees appear among the top-ranked filers alongside dedicated skin-substitute companies, and the strongest co-assignee pairs in the dataset link a university medical centre with its affiliated university or national research institute — a pattern typical of clinical-translation partnerships.
Slowed activity is broad, not isolated
Several of the assignees with the largest historical portfolios show zero filings in the latest tracked year, including one with a -100% year-on-year change. Given the 18-month publication lag, this reflects the same cooling seen in the aggregate trend rather than an exit from the field.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Stratatech Corp | 0 | — |
| Gearbox LLC | 0 | — |
| Garnet Biotherapeutics Inc | 0 | — |
| University of Sheffield | 0 | -100% |
| Wake Forest University Health Sciences Inc | 0 | — |
| XENOTHERAPEUTICS INC | 0 | — |
| 3M Innovative Properties Company (US) | 0 | — |
| Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The aggregate numbers point to where to look next; the underlying claims decide whether a given approach is actually clear to file.
Check freedom to operate against the top 10
With 34.7% of all 1,062 records held by the top 10 of 100 ranked assignees, any new filing anchored in sterilisation, decellularization or cell-seeding methods should be checked against those portfolios specifically, not just the field average.
Run a freedom-to-operate search in EurekaWatch the 2025-2026 publication window
The apparent post-2021 slowdown is only confirmed through 2024; records from 2025 and 2026 are still arriving under normal publication lag and could revise the trend once complete.
Track filing trends in EurekaExplore the lighter-claimed IPC branches
Peptide/protein chemistry, body-fluid devices and bioreactor apparatus each sit at 7% or under of the 1,062 records, well below the sterilisation and medicinal-preparation clusters — a starting point for scoping less contested claim territory.
Explore white space in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
One assignee leads clearly with 84 of the 1,062 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-ranked assignee at 29 and the tenth-ranked at 23. The top 5 assignees together hold 247 records, or 23.3% of all records, and the top 10 hold 34.7%. Beyond that group the field spreads into a long tail of universities, hospital systems and smaller companies with one or a handful of filings each, so freedom-to-operate work needs to look past the leader alone.
Filing peaked at 83 published records in 2019 and has eased since; the most reliable comparison available is a 34% decline from 50 records in 2021 to 33 in 2024. Because publications lag actual filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures in any chart are still incomplete and should not yet be read as confirming a continued drop. Treat 2024 as the last year with a dependable count.
A61L, covering sterilising and disinfecting, appears on 48.1% of the 1,062 records and is the densest single classification, followed by A61K medicinal preparations at 40.6% and C12N microorganisms and genetic engineering at 35.3%. Implants and prostheses (A61F) and therapeutic activity of compounds (A61P) each cover under a fifth of records, and peptide chemistry, body-fluid devices and bioreactor apparatus each sit near 7%. Since a single record can carry multiple classifications, these percentages overlap rather than summing to 100%.
US20240131230A1, filed by L&C Bio Co., Ltd. and published 2024-04-25, claims an acellular skin substitute prepared without proteolytic enzymes or surfactants, then custom-cut with design software and a CNC machine specifically for breast reconstruction implant coverage. Its scope is tied to that particular acellularization method and the CNC-shaping step for implant coverage, so it constrains that specific process and application rather than acellular skin substitutes generally. Work using different decellularization chemistry, different cutting methods, or different surgical applications sits outside its claims as described.
The lighter-claimed IPC branches relative to the sterilisation and medicinal-preparation core include peptide and protein-based scaffold chemistry (C07K, 7.2% of records), body-fluid management devices at graft sites (A61M, 6.6%), and bioreactor-scale cell-seeding apparatus (C12M, 6.6%). Storage-condition and reimbursement-code language appears in the search construction but is comparatively thin as a standalone claim focus in the results returned. These lower-density areas are worth scoping first, though a full clearance search is still needed before drafting.
Research Skin Substitutes and Bioengineered Grafts in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole skin substitutes and bioengineered grafts 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.