Surface Treatments for Bone Integration Patents: Leaders & Gaps 2026
- Concentrated at the top. The five leading assignees hold 56.3% of all 64 records in scope, and the leading ten hold 73.4% — this is a field with a defined core group, not a diffuse one.
- Filing has cooled from its 2019 peak. Filings peaked at 10 in 2019; the last complete comparison shows a decline from 8 in 2021 to 5 in 2024, a -38% move over that span.
- Dentistry and sterilising classes dominate. A61C and A61L each cover 37.5% of the 64 records, while additive manufacturing (B33Y) touches only 9.4% — the newer processing routes are still lightly claimed.
Filing growth compares 2021 (8 records) with 2024 (5) — 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 64 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This review tracks 64 published patent records matching implant surface treatment, osseointegration surface and bioactive implant coating language, cross-referenced against hydroxyapatite coating, acid etching, anodization, wettability, bone ingrowth and coating delamination terms. The scope runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off, spanning dental implants, orthopaedic hardware and the surface-processing techniques applied to titanium, zirconia and related substrates before implantation.
Coverage skews toward dental applications and toward the physical and chemical surface-modification methods used to encourage bone ingrowth rather than toward the base implant designs themselves. Publication naturally lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent one to two years in any trend chart will fill in further as those applications publish.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 64-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the underlying technology falls into.
Filings rose to a 2019 peak, then eased back
Annual filings climbed to a peak of 10 in 2019 before settling lower; the most reliable comparison — 2021 at 8 against 2024 at 5, a -38% change — points to a maturing rather than an expanding filing pace. Years after 2024 are still incomplete because of publication lag and should not be read as a further drop.
Dentistry and sterilising classes carry the most filings
A61C (dentistry) and A61L (sterilising and disinfecting) each appear in 37.5% of the 64 records, with A61F (implants and prostheses) close behind at 28.1%. Metallurgy and additive-manufacturing classes — B22F, B23K, C22C and B33Y — each sit under 15%, marking them as smaller, more specialised slices of the same filing base rather than mainstream routes.
Shares are the percentage of the 64 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Surface Treatments for Bone Integration with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about surface treatments for bone integration and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records and a recent filing
EP4643815A1 — dental implant surface treatment combining laser grooving with acid etching
The application discloses a two-step dental implant surface treatment: a first step forming regular-pattern grooves across the implant surface with a laser, followed by a second step that roughens the grooves and their peripheries through acid etching. The laser step itself is split into primary and secondary processing passes, producing a controlled, repeatable groove geometry ahead of the chemical roughening step.Filed by Osstem Implant Co. Ltd., published 2025-11-05.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6069295A | Implant material | 189 |
| 2 | US6146686A | Implant material and process for using it | 89 |
| 3 | EP0806211A1 | Implant material and process for producing it | 77 |
| 4 | CN105854080A | 一种氧化锆牙种植体表面处理方法 | 19 |
| 5 | US20110318835A1 | Implant Surface Treatment Method Having Tissues Integrated | 10 |
| 6 | EP0806211B1 | Implant material and process for producing it | 9 |
| 7 | WO2007040298A1 | Electrolyte solution for implant surface treatment, method for implant surface treatment using the same, and … | 7 |
| 8 | US20210361434A1 | Metal-ceramic composite joint prosthesis and applications and manufacturing method thereof | 6 |
| 9 | CN112168433A | 钴合金分区骨小梁单间室股骨髁假体及制备方法 | 5 |
| 10 | CN112296342A | 含氧化层锆铌合金分区骨小梁单间室股骨髁及制备方法 | 4 |
Citation counts reward older filings that have had more time to accumulate references; treat them as a signal of influence within this corpus, not as a ranking of current technical importance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 R&D and IP teams
Three read-outs from the filing and citation data that matter for deciding where to build and where to search before filing.
A defined core group, not a fragmented field
The five leading assignees account for 56.3% of all 64 records in scope, rising to 73.4% across the ten leading assignees. A new entrant should expect to design around, or license from, this core group rather than finding open ground among many small filers.
Cooling from a 2019 peak, not accelerating
Annual filings peaked at 10 in 2019 and had fallen to 5 by 2024, a -38% move from the 8 filed in 2021. That is a slower pace of new claim-staking, which can mean either that the core surface-treatment techniques are becoming settled art or that filers are consolidating around fewer, broader applications.
Dental and sterilising classes anchor the field
A61C and A61L each cover 37.5% of the 64 records, confirming dental implants and surface disinfection as the anchor use cases. Additive manufacturing (B33Y, 9.4%) and alloy composition (C22C, 10.9%) are present but comparatively thin, suggesting these newer processing angles are less contested.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to surface treatments for bone integration, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the claim space is thin
The ranked leaders sit alongside a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants; momentum among several previously active filers has dropped to zero in the latest year, which is as much a publication-lag artefact as a sign of exit.
One filer sets the pace
The leading assignee holds 9 of the 64 records in scope, ahead of a fifth-place holder at 5 and a tenth-place holder at 2 — a steep drop-off that marks this as a leader-plus-tail structure rather than an even spread.
China is the largest single receiving office
China accounts for 27 filings, ahead of Europe (EPO) at 13 and the United States at 11, with smaller counts through Austria, WIPO/PCT and Canada. Freedom-to-operate work should weight Chinese prior art accordingly rather than defaulting to a US/EP-first search.
Several established filers show no latest-year activity
A number of assignees that filed steadily in earlier years — including one with a -100% year-on-year change — show zero filings in the latest year. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this likely reflects applications still in the pipeline rather than a confirmed pullback.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Jiasite Huajian Medical Equipment (Tianjin) Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Beijing AKEC Medical Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Kyungpook National University Industry-Academic Cooperation Foundation | 0 | — |
| Osstem Implant Co., Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
| ISOTIS BV | 0 | — |
| Guilin Woodpecker Medical Instrument Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Kaohsiung Medical University | 0 | — |
| Chengdu Baishimei Biotechnology Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to a few concrete next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing or new filing strategy.
Map the leading assignees' full portfolios
With over half of all records held by five assignees, a portfolio-level view of each leader's claim scope — not just their record count — is the fastest way to spot where their coverage actually stops.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaSearch Chinese prior art before filing
China leads receiving-office volume at 27 filings; a freedom-to-operate search that under-weights Chinese-language filings risks missing the largest single bloc of prior art in this field.
Run a prior art search in EurekaProbe the additive-manufacturing and alloy branches
B33Y and C22C classes sit under 15% of records each, well below the dental and sterilising core — worth checking whether that reflects genuine white space or simply an emerging area not yet fully published.
Analyze white space in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
The dataset's leading assignee holds 9 of the 64 records in scope, with the five leading assignees together accounting for 56.3% of all records. That concentration extends to the ten leading assignees, who together hold 73.4% of the field. A newcomer should expect meaningful overlap with this core group's existing claims rather than open ground.
Filings peaked at 10 in 2019 and had fallen to 5 by 2024, down 38% from the 8 filed in 2021 — the most reliable comparison available, since later years are still incomplete due to publication lag. This pattern looks more like a maturing filing base than either sustained growth or an active field. Treat any apparent drop in 2025 or 2026 figures as provisional rather than a confirmed trend.
Dentistry (A61C) and sterilising and disinfecting (A61L) each cover 37.5% of the 64 records, making them the two largest technology classes, with implants and prostheses (A61F) at 28.1% close behind. Metallurgy-adjacent classes — powder metallurgy, welding/brazing, alloys and additive manufacturing — each sit under 15%, indicating lighter claim density in those processing-focused branches. A record can carry more than one class, so these percentages overlap rather than sum to 100%.
EP4643815A1, filed by Osstem Implant Co. Ltd. and published in November 2025, covers a two-step dental implant surface treatment: laser-formed regular grooves in a first step, followed by acid etching to roughen the grooves and their surrounding surface in a second step. The laser step itself is broken into a primary and a secondary processing pass. As a recent filing it is a useful marker of current claim direction in laser-plus-etching combination methods, though its enforceability and exact claim scope should be checked against the granted claim set rather than the abstract alone.
Additive-manufactured porous surface lattices, fine anodization parameter control, and alloy-substrate bonding methods each show materially lower filing density than the dental and sterilising core classes, with B33Y present in only 9.4% of the 64 records. These branches are not necessarily technically easier, but they carry fewer prior filings to design around. Confirming whether that reflects genuine white space or simply un-published recent activity requires a targeted prior art search rather than relying on the headline class counts alone.
Research Surface Treatments for Bone Integration in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole surface treatments for bone integration 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.