Background: To investigate the efficacy interval of the topical therapies available for primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and the ocular and systemic features potentially associated. Methods: This retrospective study included 190 patients with POAG undergoing first topical therapy, throughout a follow-up of 15 years. The patients started one topical intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering drug within single molecules such betablockers, prostaglandin or dorzolamide, or fixed combinations such as betablockers + prostaglandin, betablockers + dorzolamide, or betablockers + brimonidine. Efficacy duration was measured as the time between the start of the therapy and the change due to IOP increase or visual field worsening. For each patient, ocular and systemic features and comorbidities were analysed to detect any significant correlation with the length of effectiveness of every drug used. Results: The molecules explored showed some discrepancies in terms of mean duration of efficacy; however, no significant differences were demonstrated (p > 0.05). Furthermore, when evaluating the overall cohort, no systemic or ocular features correlated significantly with the effectiveness of the molecules explored. However, the same analysis carried out upon stratifying the different groups according to the IOP-lowering drops they received, demonstrated that the drug efficacy could be influenced by several ocular and systemic features. Conclusion: Data observed in this study suggest that there is no difference in using one of the medications evaluated as first choice of treatment of POAG if the patients are accurately evaluated and the most recent guidelines are adopted.

Background: We evaluate the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in the following formulas—Barrett True-K No History (BTKNH), EVO 2.0 Post-Hyperopic LASIK/PRK (EVO 2.0), Haigis-L, Pearl-DGS, and Shammas (SF)—with patients who have undergone cataract surgery at the Eye Unit of University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Naples, Italy, and had prior hyperopic laser refractive surgery. Methods: A monocentric, retrospective, comparative study, including the charts of patients who had undergone cataract surgery and previous hyperopic laser refractive surgery, was retrospectively reviewed. Patients with no other ocular or systemic disease which might interfere with visual acuity results and no operative complications or combined surgery were enrolled. The mean absolute prediction error (MAE) was calculated for each formula and compared. Subgroup analysis based on the axial length and mean keratometry was performed. Results: A total of 107 patients (107 eyes) were included. The MAE calculated with SF provided less accurate (p < 0.05) results when compared to both BTKNH and EVO 2.0 formulas. The MAE obtained using Haigis-L, EVO 2.0, Pearl-DGS, and BTKNH showed no significant differences. Conclusions: The analysis of the accuracy of the selected formulas shows no clear advantage in using one specific formula in standard cases, but in eyes where it is mandatory to reach the target refraction, SF should be avoided.

1. Pathogenic variants in the CRX gene, which encodes a transcription factor essential for photoreceptor development and maintenance (1–3) are associated with a broad spectrum of inherited retinal ...