EARLY EXPERIENCE OF ENDOART IN THE UNITED KINGDOM: A CASE SERIES OF 10 EYES
Published 2026 - 30th ESCRS Winter Meeting
Reference: PP01.01 | Type: Presented Poster & Poster | DOI: 10.82333/bhhb-hm18
Authors: Leo Feinberg* 1 , Harry Roberts 1 , Shakeel Ahmad 1 , Poonam Sharma 1
1Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust,Exeter,United Kingdom
Purpose
To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the EndoArt artificial endothelial implant in patients with limited prognosis for conventional endothelial keratoplasty.
Setting
Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, United Kingdom.
Methods
This retrospective interventional case series included 10 eyes of 10 patients who underwent EndoArt implantation between December 2024 and September 2025.
Primary outcomes were best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central corneal thickness (CCT). Secondary outcomes included the need for additional interventions and the incidence of adverse events.
Results
Six patients (60%) had a history of previous penetrating or endothelial keratoplasty, including four (40%) with multiple (2–4) failed grafts. Nine patients (90%) had complex glaucoma with prior filtration surgery, and three (30%) were aphakic. Indications for surgery was vision in 5 (50%) and comfort/bullous keratopathy in 5 (50%). All patients had significant vision limiting comorbidities. Mean follow-up was 5 months (range 1–10). Five eyes (50%) required at least one re-bubbling, and four (40%) required suture revision; four patients underwent multiple (2–4) re-bubbling procedures. At last follow-up, 9 eyes (90%) had a fully attached EndoArt, while 1 (10%) were awaiting further intervention. All implants remained optically clear, centred, and stable.
Average pre-operative visual acuity was 1.93logMAR (1.0 – 2.7). For patients where the indication for surgery was vision, visual acuity improved from 1.67 (1.1 – 2.3) to 0.62 (0.5 – 0.72). For patients where the indication was comfort, 4/5 (80%) achieved resolution of discomfort. For 8 cases with fully attached EndoArt, mean CCT decreased from 787 ± 93 µm to 585 ± 67 µm. No cases of endophthalmitis occurred. One case of suprachoroidal haemorrhage occurred during a revision. One case had persistent epithelial defects in the post operative phase.
Conclusion
EndoArt represents a promising donor-free alternative for patients unsuitable for keratoplasty. Early experience highlights a demanding postoperative course, with frequent need for re-bubbling and close follow-up.