https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/surgical-robot-simulation-and-modeling-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Robotics & Automation
Surgical Robot Simulation and Modeling Patents
  • Filing peaked in 2022 at 77 families and has not been matched since — the field looks flat-to-declining rather than accelerating, even accounting for publication lag.
  • A61B carries 266 of 435 records but G09B (educational aids) still holds 147, showing training-hardware claims run almost as deep as the core surgical-device claims.
  • The most-cited record dates to the mid-2000s US7155316B2 at 2,209 citations — influence in this corpus still traces back to early microsurgical robot architecture, not recent filings.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
435
Published Records
45%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-42%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction

Filing growth compares 2021 (66 records) with 2024 (38) — 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 435 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.

Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this landscape covers

Surgical robot simulation and modeling sits at the intersection of two claim traditions: the surgical robotics itself (A61B) and the training and demonstration apparatus built to rehearse on it (G09B). This dataset pulls 435 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine both — systems that simulate tissue interaction, force feedback or virtual procedures alongside an actual or intended robotic surgical platform.

Filing offices skew heavily toward the United States, with the EPO and WIPO PCT route both active, and secondary volume from India, Germany and Australia — consistent with a field where clinical device makers file first at home and extend selectively.

Filing activity, 2017–2026
  1. 1CILAG GMBH INTERNATIONAL99
  2. 2INTUITIVE SURGICAL OPERATIONS INC41
  3. 3SONY GROUP CORP19
  4. 4COVIDIEN LP19
  5. 5JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY18
  6. 6KINDHEART17
  7. 7SURGICAL THEATER INC15
  8. 8IX INNOVATION LLC14
  9. 9IMRIS IMAGING INC12
  10. 10HUTOM CO LTD11
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surgical Robot Simulation and Modeling 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 data

Filing trend and technology composition

Two views of the same 435 families: how filing volume moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim weight.

Filing trend

Annual filings rose from 18 in 2017 to a peak of 77 in 2022, then eased off — the 2026 figure of 4 is a partial year and will revise upward, but the plateau around the 2022 midpoint points to a maturing rather than expanding filing pace.

Filing trend020406080182017201820192020202177202220232024202542026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

IPC composition

A61B (diagnosis & surgery) leads at 266 records, with G09B (educational & demonstration aids) at 147 and G16H (healthcare informatics) at 106 close behind — evidence that simulation and training claims are filed nearly as often as the underlying surgical mechanism itself. G06T (image processing) and G06N (AI models) sit further back, marking newer, thinner claim layers.

IPC compositionA61B · Diagnosis & surgery26661.1%G09B · Educational & demonstration ai…14733.8%G16H · Healthcare informatics10624.4%G06F · Electric digital data processi…7617.5%G06T · Image data processing & genera…5813.3%G06N · Computing based on AI models317.1%B25J · Manipulators & robots266.0%H04L · Digital information transmissi…225.1%Other11626.7%

Shares are the percentage of the 435 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 Robot Simulation and Modeling covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Surgical Robot Simulation and Modeling with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about surgical robot simulation and modeling and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Key patents

The records shaping this space

Representative filing
US20180338806A12018-11-29

US20180338806A1 — Surgical simulation system using force sensing and optical tracking and robotic surgery system

INTUITIVE SURGICAL OPERATIONS, INC.

A surgical simulation device includes a support structure and animal tissue carried in a tray. A simulated human skeleton is carried by the support structure above the animal tissue and includes simulated human skin. A camera images the animal tissue and an image processor receives images of markers positioned on the ribs and animal tissue and forms a three-dimensional wireframe image. An operating table is adjacent a local robotic surgery station as part of a robotic surgery station and includes at least one patient support configured to support the patient during robotic surgery. At least one patient force/torque sensor is coupled to the at least one patient support.Filed by Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc. — combines a physical tissue-and-skeleton rig with optical tracking and force sensing tied directly to a robotic surgery station, rather than a pure software simulator.

US20180338806A1 — patent drawing 1US20180338806A1 — patent drawing 2
View full record
Most-cited records in this corpus
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US7155316B2Microsurgical robot system2,209
2US8108072B2Methods and systems for robotic instrument tool tracking with adaptive fusion of kinematics information and i…1,742
3US20160314716A1Telerobotic surgery system for remote surgeon training using remote surgery station and party conferencing an…1,030
4US20160314717A1Telerobotic surgery system for remote surgeon training using robotic surgery station coupled to remote surgeo…807
5US20070018958A1Force reflective robotic control system and minimally invasive surgical device745
6US10813710B2Telerobotic surgery system using minimally invasive surgical tool with variable force scaling and feedback an…555
7US20180250086A1Telerobotic surgery system using minimally invasive surgical tool with variable force scaling and feedback an…522
8US20090088634A1Tool tracking systems and methods for image guided surgery519
9US20040111183A1Microsurgical robot system365
10US8457930B2Personalized fit and functional designed medical prostheses and surgical instruments and methods for making342

Citation counts favour older filings simply by being searchable longer; treat rank here as historical influence, not current commercial weight.

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 Robot Simulation and Modeling 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
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 →
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 numbers say

Four read-throughs from the filing trend, IPC spread and citation data.

Filing pace
77 in 2022
peak year

Growth has plateaued, not accelerated

Filings climbed from 18 in 2017 to a peak of 77 in 2022 and have not exceeded that since. Even allowing for the 18-month publication lag understating 2025-2026, the shape is a plateau rather than a growth curve.

Filing trend, 2017-2026
Claim depth
266 vs 147
A61B vs G09B records

Training hardware claims run nearly as deep as surgical-device claims

G09B (educational and demonstration aids) accounts for 147 of 435 records against A61B's 266. That ratio signals simulation and training rigs are a genuine second claim front, not an afterthought bolted onto surgical device filings.

IPC composition
Influence base
2,209 citations
top-cited record

Influence still traces to early microsurgical architecture

The most-cited record, US7155316B2, describes a microsurgical robot system and predates most of the corpus. Recent filings build on that base rather than displacing it in citation terms.

Most-cited records
Collaboration
10 co-assignee pairs
across the corpus

Co-filing is sparse and academically anchored

Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across 435 families, and the strongest links involve a university partnering with named individual inventors rather than another company — a field still filing mostly solo.

Co-assignee pairs
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 robot simulation and modeling, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surgical Robot Simulation and Modeling 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 active, and where the field is thin

Recent-year momentum across the tracked assignees is uniformly weak — most show zero filings in the latest year, and the strongest historical filer is down sharply year over year.

Momentum
-100% YoY
leading historical filer

The most active historical filer has gone quiet

The assignee with the deepest filing history in this dataset shows a -100% year-on-year change in the latest tracked year, alongside several other named assignees at zero filings — a sign the field's early leaders have largely stopped adding to their positions.

Recent-year momentum
New entrants
1 filing
latest-year activity

Latest-year activity is a single filing

Among tracked assignees, only one shows any filing at all in the most recent year, and even that is flat at 0% YoY. This is consistent with the broader plateau in the filing trend rather than a sign of new entrants displacing incumbents.

Recent-year momentum
Collaboration pattern
4 shared families
strongest co-assignee pair

Academic-industry links are thin but present

The strongest co-assignee pair in the dataset links a university to a named individual inventor across 4 shared families, with a second pair at 3 — small numbers that suggest most simulation IP is being built and held inside single organisations rather than through joint ventures.

Co-assignee pairs
🔍
Under-claimed sub-areas
Branches with filing density well below the A61B/G09B core
Haptic tissue-deformation feedback loopsAI-driven procedural skill scoringMulti-user remote proctoring conferencingPatient-specific soft-tissue biomechanical modelsCross-platform simulator-to-robot data portability
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
Cilag International AG10%
KINDHEART0
Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc.0
Sony Group Corporation0
Covidien LP0
Johns Hopkins University0-100%
IX INNOVATION LLC0
Surgical Theater, Inc.0
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surgical Robot Simulation and Modeling 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 take this

Three directions to pressure-test before committing engineering or filing budget to this space.

Map claim boundaries around force-feedback tissue rigs

The representative filing ties a physical tissue rig to optical tracking and force sensing on an actual robotic station — check how tightly that combination is claimed before designing a similar bench setup.

Explore claim scope in Eureka

Watch for a re-acceleration past the 2022 peak

With every tracked assignee at or near zero in the latest year, the next real signal will be whichever organisation breaks that pattern first — worth setting an alert rather than assuming the plateau holds.

Track assignee activity in Eureka

Test the under-claimed branches before the core

Haptic feedback loops, AI-driven skill scoring and cross-platform data portability all sit well below the A61B/G09B filing density — cheaper ground to stake a first claim on than the crowded core.

Run a white-space search in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surgical Robot Simulation and Modeling 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

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surgical Robot Simulation and Modeling 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 Robot Simulation and Modeling in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole surgical robot simulation and modeling corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

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.