Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/surgical-navigation-registration-technology-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Biomedical Devices · Patent LandscapeSurgical navigation registration patents: who is still filing, and where
- Filing has cooled since the 2022 peak. 215 families that year against 164 in 2017 and just 19 so far in the partial latest year — activity crested rather than kept climbing.
- Registration claims sit inside a much bigger imaging stack. 425 records also carry a G06T image-processing code, more than triple the next largest adjacent class, so registration method claims are frequently bundled with image-reconstruction claims.
- Recent-year momentum is negative across the named assignees. Every tracked assignee in the momentum data shows a year-on-year decline, several down to zero or one filing, pointing to a consolidating rather than expanding field.
1,874
Published Records
26%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-19%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (195 records) with 2024 (158) — 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 1,874 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 1,874 patent families filed between 2017 and 2026 that combine surgical navigation or image-guided surgery terminology with registration methods — optical tracking, electromagnetic tracking, or intraoperative imaging registration — under the core IPC classes for computer-aided surgery. Registration is the step that maps a preoperative or intraoperative image onto the patient's actual anatomy in the operating room, so claims in this space cover trackers, fiducials, coordinate-transfer methods and the software that reconciles them.
Filing is concentrated in the United States (752 records) and Europe (340), with China's 340-strong caseload built largely through the PCT route rather than direct filings, and Canada and Australia trailing as secondary jurisdictions. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the 19 records recorded so far in the most recent year understate real filing activity for that period.
Filing volume by year and by receiving office
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surgical Navigation Registration Technology covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
10,000 free credits to start
The numbers
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 1,874-family dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
Filings rose to a 2022 peak, then declined
From 164 families in 2017, filings climbed to a peak of 215 in 2022 before falling back; the 19 records logged in the most recent partial year are an undercount because of publication lag, but the multi-year direction since 2022 is downward rather than flat.
Registration claims cluster with image processing
Every record in this set falls under A61B (diagnosis and surgery), the anchor class. The next largest cluster, G06T image data processing at 425 records, shows registration methods are commonly claimed alongside image reconstruction or augmented-reality rendering rather than as a standalone mechanical or optical claim. A61F implants (139), G16H healthcare informatics (109) and G06F general data processing (92) form a smaller secondary tier, with G02B optics, H04N video and A61M fluid-device codes appearing only at the margins.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,874 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surgical Navigation Registration Technology covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Surgical Navigation Registration Technology with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about surgical navigation registration technology and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey patents
The most-cited filings, and one to read closely
Representative filing
Transferring a registration between two surgical navigation systems
STRYKER EUROPEAN OPERATIONS LIMITED
US20200297428A1, assigned to Stryker European Operations, describes a method and hybrid navigation system for transferring a three-dimensional image-data registration of a surgical object from a first navigation system to a second. Each system tracks the same fixed object through its own tracker and detector, and the method carries the coordinate-system registration from one to the other rather than requiring the second system to re-register from scratch.Filed 2020-09-24. This is a coordination-layer claim — it operates on top of whatever tracking hardware each system already uses.
Most-cited records in this corpus
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20160191887A1 | Image-guided surgery with surface reconstruction and augmented reality visualization | 764 |
| 2 | US10182868B2 | Apparatus and methods for using an electromagnetic transponder in orthopedic procedures | 603 |
| 3 | US20160242855A1 | Real-Time Surgical Navigation | 518 |
| 4 | US20170367771A1 | Surgical Navigation Inside A Body | 443 |
| 5 | US20160324580A1 | Systems and methods for assisted surgical navigation | 419 |
| 6 | US7392076B2 | System and method of registering image data to intra-operatively digitized landmarks | 362 |
| 7 | US20180049622A1 | Systems and methods for sensory augmentation in medical procedures | 325 |
| 8 | US20180263710A1 | Medical imaging apparatus and surgical navigation system | 282 |
| 9 | US20170202633A1 | Imaging and display system for guiding medical interventions | 271 |
| 10 | US20180240237A1 | Systems and Methods of Registration for Image-Guided Surgery | 270 |
Citation counts favour older records simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations within the searched corpus; treat this as a measure of influence on later filings, not of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surgical Navigation Registration Technology covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Insights
What the data implies for a filing decision
Three read-throughs from the trend, the technology mix and the citation table.
Trend
215 in 2022 vs 19 latest year
peak vs most recent (partial)
The field has passed its filing peak
Growth ran from 164 families in 2017 to a peak of 215 in 2022, then declined. Even allowing for publication lag understating the final year, the multi-year pattern is a plateau followed by a pullback rather than continued expansion.
Use the peak year as a benchmark for how crowded core claims already are.
Technology mix
425 records also under G06T
image processing overlap
Registration is rarely claimed in isolation
The next-largest IPC code after the anchor A61B class is G06T, image data processing, at more than three times the count of the third-ranked class. New filings in pure tracking hardware face less crowding than filings that bundle registration with image reconstruction or AR overlay.
A claim that stays purely mechanical or optical, and out of G06T, sees a thinner prior-art field.
Citations
764 citations on the top record
leading cited filing
Foundational claims date to the mid-2010s
The most-cited records in this corpus were published between 2016 and 2018, ahead of the 2022 filing peak. Their claim language on surface reconstruction, real-time navigation and electromagnetic transponder use in orthopedics forms the prior art that later filers had to design around.
Read these before drafting anything touching surface reconstruction or AR-overlay navigation.
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to surgical navigation registration technology, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surgical Navigation Registration Technology covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who is filing, and how actively
Assignee-level momentum in the most recent year is negative across the board, which points to a maturing rather than a growing competitive set.
Momentum
-67% YoY
Orthosoft ULC
Orthosoft ULC is slowing but still active
Orthosoft ULC recorded 2 filings in the latest year, down 67% year on year, keeping a thin but present filing cadence in registration methods.
Still filing, at a reduced rate.
Momentum
-100% YoY
Multiple named assignees at zero
Several established filers dropped to zero
Globus Medical and Stryker European Operations both show a 100% year-on-year drop to zero filings in the latest year, and Orthosoft's parent entity shows zero as well, consistent with either a filing pause or a shift to unpublished applications still in the pipeline.
A zero year does not confirm exit — check for pending unpublished applications.
Co-filing
26 co-assignee filings
strongest pair
Corporate-family co-filing is concentrated
The strongest co-assignee pairing in the dataset links Smith & Nephew's parent entity with its Asia-Pacific and orthopedics subsidiaries at 26 shared filings each, reflecting an internal corporate filing structure rather than cross-company collaboration.
Ten co-assignee pairs total — a small, mostly intra-group network.
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| ORTHOSOFT ULC | 2 | -67% |
| MAKO Surgical Corp. | 1 | -83% |
| Smith & Nephew, Inc. | 1 | -50% |
| Globus Medical, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Orthosoft Inc. | 0 | — |
| Stryker European Operations Limited | 0 | -100% |
| Smith+Nephew Intelligent Joint Surgery | 0 | -100% |
| Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surgical Navigation Registration Technology covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's next
Where to go from this landscape
The trend and assignee data point to a field past its filing peak but still active in specific niches. The next steps depend on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate or a new filing.
Check the under-claimed branches against your own claim draft
Cross-system registration handoff and modality-crossing registration transfer both show thinner filing density than the A61B/G06T core — worth checking before assuming a route is blocked.
Explore white space in EurekaMap the citation network around the top five filings
The most-cited records date to 2016-2018 and define much of the prior art that later filers designed around; tracing their citation trees surfaces the design-around patterns already in use.
Trace citations in EurekaWatch for unpublished filings behind the zero-momentum assignees
Several named assignees show a drop to zero in the latest year, which given the 18-month publication lag may reflect pending rather than abandoned filing activity.
Track assignee activity in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surgical Navigation Registration Technology covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions on this landscape
In this landscape, it is a filing that combines surgical navigation or image-guided surgery terminology with a registration method — optical tracking, electromagnetic tracking, or intraoperative imaging registration — classified under the core IPC codes for computer-aided surgery (A61B34/20, A61B90/00, A61B34/10). Registration is the technical step that aligns a preoperative scan or intraoperative image with the patient's actual anatomy so a tracked instrument's position on the image corresponds to its real position in the body. Claims in this space range from tracker hardware to the coordinate-transform software that performs the alignment.
Yes, based on this dataset. Filings rose from 164 families in 2017 to a peak of 215 in 2022, then declined; the 19 families recorded in the most recent partial year continue that downward direction, though publication lag of roughly 18 months means the true count for the latest year is understated. Recent-year momentum figures for individual assignees reinforce this — every named assignee in the dataset shows flat or negative year-on-year filing activity.
The dataset's momentum tracking covers assignees including Orthosoft ULC, Stryker European Operations, Globus Medical, and Smith & Nephew entities, all of which show declining or zero filings in the most recent year rather than growth. Smith & Nephew's corporate family also shows the strongest co-assignee filing pattern in the dataset, at 26 shared filings between its parent and regional subsidiaries. This points to a field where established orthopedic and navigation device makers dominate the historical filing base rather than new entrants driving current volume.
The thinner sub-areas relative to the dense A61B and G06T core include cross-system registration handoff, registration transfer across imaging modalities, and fiducial-free electromagnetic tracking approaches. These sit adjacent to the heavily claimed surface-reconstruction and real-time navigation space defined by the most-cited filings from 2016-2018. A first claim in one of these branches would need to specifically avoid overlapping the image-reconstruction and AR-overlay claim language that dominates the G06T-tagged filings.
425 of the 1,874 records in this corpus also carry a G06T image data processing code, more than three times the count of the next largest adjacent class. This happens because registration is rarely claimed as a standalone mechanical or optical step; most filings bundle the coordinate-alignment method with the image reconstruction, rendering, or augmented-reality overlay that displays the result to the surgeon. A claim drafted to stay outside G06T territory, focused purely on tracking or coordinate-transfer mechanics, faces a comparatively thinner prior-art field.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surgical Navigation Registration Technology covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Surgical Navigation Registration Technology in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole surgical navigation registration technology 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.