Background: To assess visual quality and stabilization of refractive changes in corneal edema patients after cataract surgery, using visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity measurements. Methods: Sixty-one eyes were analysed, twenty-three with and thirty-eight without corneal edema. Uncorrected and corrected distance VA (UDVA and CDVA) were determined with an EDTRS chart, the contrast sensitivity function (CSF) under photopic and mesopic illumination conditions with a CVS-1000e chart, clinical refraction, and corneal topography. Measurements were taken preoperatively, 1–2 days, 1 and 3-months after surgery. Clinical refraction was converted to vector notation (M, J₀, J₄₅) and SPSS v26.0 was used for data analysis. Results: An improvement of VA was observed through the postoperative period; changes between visits were significant for CDVA in both groups and for UDVA in the edema sample. Significant astigmatic changes (J₀,J₄₅) between visits were not observed, but M values showed a hyperopic tendency in the edema group and a myopic shift in the control group that did not change between visits, with statistically significant differences between groups. Controls had significantly better contrast sensitivity at high spatial frequencies. Under mesopic conditions, global contrast sensitivity losses were observed in the edema group, which improved between visits in the middle frequency range. Conclusion: Corneal edema patients had a significant reduction of CDVA, and frequency-selective sensitivity losses that evidence a visual quality loss. Clinical refraction may improve visual quality, but in edema patients these losses are related to corneal changes, which did not change at three months after surgery.

(1) Purpose: To assess the main corneal response differences between normal and subclinical keratoconus (SCKC) with a Corvis^® ST device. (2) Material and Methods: We selected 183 eyes of normal patients, of a mean age of 33 ± 9 years and 16 eyes of patients with SCKC of a similar mean age. We measured best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and corneal topography with a Pentacam HD device to select the SCKC group. Biomechanical measurements were performed using the Corvis^® ST device. We carried out a non-parametric analysis of the data with SPSS software (Wilcoxon signed rank-test). (3) Results: We found statistically significant differences between the control and SCKC groups in some corneal biomechanical parameters: first and second applanation time (p = 0.05 and p = 0.02), maximum deformation amplitude (p = 0.016), highest concavity radius (p = 0.007), and second applanation length and corneal velocity ((p = 0.039 and p = 0.016). (4) Conclusions: Our results show that the use of normalised biomechanical parameters provided by noncontact tonometry, combined with a discriminant function theory, is a useful tool for detecting subclinical keratoconus.

Background/Objectives: Glaucoma affects over 70 million people worldwide and is a major cause of irreversible blindness, with elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) as the only modifiable risk factor. Conventional techniques like Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) are widely used but cannot provide continuous or nocturnal monitoring, limiting the detection of pressure peaks relevant to disease progression. Emerging technologies, including home-based devices, wearable sensors, such as contact lens-based sensors (CLBS), and implantable biomedical microelectromechanical systems (bioMEMS), offer more comprehensive and continuous assessment of IOP patterns. Thus, this scoping review aimed to map the available evidence on technologies for continuous IOP monitoring, summarizing their performance and agreement with traditional tonometry. Methods: A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identify studies published in the last 10 years evaluating self-tonometry devices, CLBS, or implantable systems designed for continuous IOP monitoring. Two reviewers independently screened articles, applied eligibility criteria, charted relevant data, including device characteristics and agreement with GAT, and reported clinical applications. Results: Self-tonometry devices demonstrated generally good agreement with GAT while enabling patients to monitor IOP outside clinical settings. These devices provided valuable information on diurnal and nocturnal IOP fluctuations, especially in individuals with rapid progression or those undergoing postoperative follow-up. BioMEMS-based wearable and implantable sensors showed promise for continuous long-term monitoring and revealed previously unrecognized fluctuation patterns, including activity-related changes. Conclusions: Emerging IOP-monitoring technologies appear to complement standard clinical methods by offering more detailed IOP profiles. Their integration into clinical practice may support individualized risk assessment and improved management of glaucoma progression.