ESCRS - FP05.05 - 6 YEAR EXPERIENCE WITH THE ENDOTHELIAL KERATOPROSTHESIS IMPLANTATIONS IN THE NETHERLANDS

6 YEAR EXPERIENCE WITH THE ENDOTHELIAL KERATOPROSTHESIS IMPLANTATIONS IN THE NETHERLANDS

Published 2026 - 30th ESCRS Winter Meeting

Reference: FP05.05 | Type: Free Paper | DOI: 10.82333/337e-xf96

Authors: Ruth Lapid* 1 , Mor Dickman 2

1Ophthalmology,Amsterdam UMC,Amsterdam,Netherlands, 2Ophthalmology,UMC Utrecht ,Utrecht,Netherlands

Purpose

To report follow up data on the Dutch EndoArt cohort with up to 6 years results of implantation with the

EndoArt (Eye Yon Medical, Israel) in terms of visual acuity, safety, device adherence, corneal clearing and thinning, and adverse

effects.

Setting

Cornea services at the Ophthalmology department of 2 Academic Institutions.

Methods

Consecutive interventional case series. The EndoArt is a dome shaped acrylic implant of 6.5 mm diameter, intended for replacement of dysfunctional endothelium. The EndoArt acts as physical barrier and prevents fluid uptake into the cornea. The barrier allows for stromal deturgescence leading to a new equilibrium & decrease in corneal thickness. The EndoArt was implanted in 20 eyes of 19 patients for indications of corneal edema. In 9 out of 20 eyes the indication was tectonic, because of complex ocular pathology. Longitudinal follow up of implanted cohort. 

Results

Follow-up ranged from 5-60 months. In 18/20 eyes the EndoArt remained adherent. In most eyes a temporary

corneal suture was used to aid initial adherence, which reduced rebubbling rates. No immediate perioperative or post

operative complications occurred; especially not pathological thinning of the cornea was seen. In 1 eye a retinal

detachment occurred at 44 months.  A mean increase of visual acuity of logMAR from 1.99 to 1.05 was seen, even though this was not expected in the most complex eyes. Mean Central corneal thickness decreased 19,3%. In 1 patient no effect was

seen. In 2 patients the EndoArt failed to adhere. In 16 of 20 patients a suture was used, which lead to better and

earlier adhesion of the EndoArt.

Conclusion

The EndoArt remained in situ in 18 patients in this cohort. In most patients’ corneal thickness and stromal

edema was reduced. In 16 of 20 eyes visual acuity improved. No complications related to the implant were seen.

Suturing the device led to decreased rebubble rates and improved adherence. Results with our patient cohort are

encouraging and may help elucidate what the best indication area is for implantation. Currently the EndoArt is used

for cases in which DMEK and other type of corneal donor transplantation are deemed to have a worse prognosis.

More follow up in more patients is

needed to elucidate the exact indications for the use of an artificial corneal endothelial device.