Therapeutic Laser Systems Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Concentration at the top. The top 5 assignees alone account for 53.4% of all 408 records in scope, and the top 10 reach 70.1% — this field is not a long tail of even competitors.
- Filing has plateaued, not grown. Activity peaked at 35 records in 2021; the 2022 midpoint sits at just 8, and the trend has stayed flat or declined since, even accounting for publication lag.
- Optics classes are comparatively open. H01S (lasers & stimulated emission) appears in only 8.1% of records and B23K and G02C each sit at 6.9% — thin coverage relative to the dominant A61B and A61F classes.
What the therapeutic laser system patent record actually shows
Therapeutic laser systems sit at the intersection of surgical device engineering and photonics: claims in this dataset span tissue-selective wavelength control, pulse duration management, skin cooling during treatment, and spot-size and treatment-endpoint detection. The search scope combines surgical and dermatological laser terminology with IPC classes covering diagnosis and surgery, laser physics, and radiation therapy, producing 408 records published between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off.
The picture that emerges is one of early concentration: a small number of assignees built dense filing positions around ophthalmic and dermatological laser platforms years ago, and subsequent filing activity has not kept pace with the 2021 peak. That combination — high concentration plus flattening volume — points to a field where the core surgical-laser mechanics are well claimed, while adjacent optical-control and manufacturing-laser classes remain comparatively thin.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 408 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how those records distribute across IPC subclasses.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Volume rose from 2 records in 2017 to a peak of 35 in 2021, then declined toward a 2022 midpoint of 8 and has stayed flat or falling since. The final year or two is always undercounted because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent figures should be read as a floor, not a ceiling.
IPC subclass composition
A61B (diagnosis & surgery) and A61F (implants & prostheses) dominate, appearing in 68.9% and 51.7% of the 408 records respectively, with A61N (electrotherapy & radiation therapy) at 40.7%. Optical-system classes G02B and G02F sit in the 21-26% range, while core laser-physics class H01S appears in just 8.1% of records — since a record can carry multiple classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should be read against the 408-record total, not against each other.
Shares are the percentage of the 408 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Therapeutic Laser Systems with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about therapeutic laser systems and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this landscape
US11291504B1 — Method of incising and ablating living tissues and surgical laser devices
The patent covers a method and laser surgical devices for incising and ablating living tissue using a pulsed surgical laser beam that is highly absorbed in tissue, combined with a separately controlled second energy source applied in a preemptive, focused manner at each treatment spot to achieve haemostasis while minimising damage to surrounding tissue. One disclosed embodiment uses a heated gas jet as the second energy source alongside the laser.Filed by SHURGALIN, MAX, DR., published 2022-04-05.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5984916A | Ophthalmic surgical laser and method | 729 |
| 2 | US6325792B1 | Ophthalmic surgical laser and method | 728 |
| 3 | US5860967A | Dermatological laser treatment system with electronic visualization of the area being treated | 370 |
| 4 | US5957915A | Hand-held laser scanner | 333 |
| 5 | US5782822A | Method and apparatus for removing corneal tissue with infrared laser radiation | 251 |
| 6 | US5049147A | Apparatus for computerized laser surgery | 243 |
| 7 | US4580557A | Surgical laser system with multiple output devices | 218 |
| 8 | US6328733B1 | Hand-held laser scanner | 196 |
| 9 | US5743902A | Hand-held laser scanner | 196 |
| 10 | US5180378A | Laser surgery system | 159 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings, since they have had more years to accumulate citations — treat this table as a signal of influence on the field, not a ranking of current 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 numbers mean for a filing decision
Three signals from the dataset that matter more than the raw record count when deciding where to file or where to license.
The core surgical-laser mechanics are already claimed
With the top 5 assignees holding 53.4% of all 408 records and the top 10 reaching 70.1%, new entrants working on core ophthalmic or dermatological laser mechanics are filing into dense prior art held by a small group. This is not a fragmented field with room for incremental claims at the centre.
Volume has flattened since the 2021 peak
Filing activity rose steadily into 2021 then dropped toward the 2022 midpoint of 8 records, and has stayed flat or declined since. Given the roughly 18-month gap between filing and publication, the last one to two years understate true activity, but the multi-year plateau predates that lag.
Laser-physics and manufacturing classes are thinly claimed
H01S (lasers & stimulated emission) appears in only 8.1% of records, with B23K (welding, soldering & brazing) and G02C (spectacles & lenses) each at 6.9%. Relative to A61B's 68.9% and A61F's 51.7%, these adjacent optical and manufacturing branches carry far less claim density.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to therapeutic laser systems, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claims, and where filing is still moving
The assignee ranking covers 100 companies, counted by records, and is dominated by a handful of ophthalmic and dermatological laser specialists with deep filing histories.
A single leader well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 80 records, more than four times the fifth-place holder's 19, indicating a filing position built up over a long period around ophthalmic surgical laser platforms rather than a recent push.
Latest-year activity has gone quiet across the leaders
Among the assignees tracked for recent-year momentum, only one shows any filing in the latest year, and it is a single record. The historical leaders show zero in that same window, consistent with the broader plateau seen in the trend data.
Collaboration is limited and concentrated around one hub
Only 7 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest pairings all involve the same lead ophthalmic laser assignee, suggesting collaboration in this field runs through corporate affiliates and named inventors rather than broad industry partnership.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| IPG Photonics Corp | 1 | — |
| Alcon LenSx Inc. | 0 | — |
| AMO Development LLC | 0 | — |
| Alcon Inc. | 0 | — |
| LENSX LASERS INC | 0 | — |
| RAKSI FERENC | 0 | — |
| LightSense Israel Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
| BUCK JESSE | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a concentrated, plateauing field with specific optical and manufacturing branches left comparatively open — the next step is testing a candidate claim against that white space directly.
Pressure-test a claim idea against the cited prior art
Before drafting around tissue-selectivity or cooling mechanisms, check it against the highest-cited records in this set, since those define what examiners will already treat as known.
Explore prior art in EurekaWatch the leading assignee's filing behaviour
With one assignee holding 80 records and most competitors filing nothing in the latest year, tracking any change in that leader's activity is a better early signal than watching the field average.
Set up assignee tracking in EurekaMap the under-claimed optical branches in detail
H01S, B23K and G02C carry a fraction of the density seen in A61B and A61F — worth a focused search before assuming the space is truly open.
Run a white space search in EurekaCommon questions about therapeutic laser system patents
The assignee ranking in this dataset is led by a single company with 80 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 19 and tenth place at 11. The top 5 assignees combined account for 53.4% of all 408 records in scope, and the top 10 reach 70.1%, so filing activity in this field is concentrated among a small group rather than spread evenly. Most of that leading position was built around ophthalmic and dermatological surgical laser platforms rather than newer entrants.
Filing volume peaked at 35 records in 2021 and has since dropped toward a 2022 midpoint of 8, staying flat or declining in the years after. The most recent one to two years are always understated because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, but the multi-year plateau predates that lag and suggests genuine slowing rather than a data artefact. Anyone evaluating this space should treat the last full year of data as a floor rather than a complete picture.
Relative to the dominant surgical and implant classes, H01S (lasers & stimulated emission) appears in only 8.1% of the 408 records, with B23K (welding, soldering & brazing) and G02C (spectacles & lenses) each at 6.9%. These are the branches with the least claim density in this dataset and are worth investigating for narrower, technically specific filings such as fiber-coupled delivery or laser-assisted tissue welding. Thin coverage does not guarantee an easy grant, but it does mean less prior art to design around.
US11291504B1 claims a method and surgical laser devices that combine a pulsed, tissue-absorbed surgical laser beam with a separately controlled second energy source, applied in a preemptive and focused manner at each treatment spot to achieve haemostasis while limiting damage to surrounding tissue. One disclosed embodiment uses a heated gas jet as that second energy source. It matters because it sits squarely in the incising-and-ablating mechanism space that much of this dataset's IPC composition (A61B, A61N) is built around, making it a reference point for anyone drafting claims on combined-energy surgical laser methods.
Patent families are the fairer unit because they neutralise the effect of aggressive continuation filing and multi-jurisdiction filing by the same applicant, which can inflate raw document counts without reflecting genuinely new invention. In this dataset, the assignee ranking is already counted in records, and the receiving-office split shows the United States, Europe and WIPO carrying the bulk of filings. Readers comparing this field to others should check whether the comparison figures use families or raw publications before drawing conclusions about relative size.
Research Therapeutic Laser Systems in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole therapeutic laser systems 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.