Précis: Using iCare Home2 (iCare, Finland) rebound tonometry, self-measurement of intraocular pressure has demonstrated good reliability and ease of use. Purpose: To investigate the reliability and repeatability of self-measured intraocular pressure (IOP) with rebound tonometry using iCare Home2. Patients and Methods: One hundred four patients out of 110 consecutive patients were recruited for this observational cross-sectional study. One randomly selected eye from each patient underwent 6 consecutive IOP measurements with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), iCare IC200, and iCare Home2. Every eye was tested twice with each device, in random order, by an ophthalmologist for GAT and IC200, and by the patient itself for Home2. In addition, central corneal thickness (CCT) has been collected. The reliability of Home2 has been tested by calculating limits of agreement (LoA) between self-measured and physician-measured IOP, using the Bland-Altman analysis. The repeatability of each device has been tested by calculating the limits of repeatability (LoR) with the same method. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to determine the correlation between differences in IOP measurements and CCT. Results: The mean difference between GAT and iCare Home2 was −0.28±1.57 mmHg (P=0.070), 95%-LoA: (−3.36 to 2.79 mmHg). The mean difference between IC200 and iCare Home2 was 0.92±1.48 mmHg (P<0.0001), 95%-LoA (−1.98 to 3.82 mmHg). The mean difference between the first and second measurements with GAT, iCare IC200, and iCare Home2 measurements was 0.21±0.98 mmHg (P=0.03), −0.02±1.11 mmHg (P=0.88) and −0.23±1.04 mmHg (P=0.05). Conclusions: Self-measured IOP with rebound tonometry showed good reliability and repeatability when compared with physician-measured IOP with both standard GAT and rebound tonometry.

Précis: Using a Compass (CMP) (CMP, Centervue, Padova, Italy) fundus perimeter, Zippy Estimation by Sequential Testing (ZEST) FAST strategy showed a significant reduction in examination time compared with ZEST, with good agreement in the quantification of perimetric damage. Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the test duration of ZEST strategy with ZEST FAST and to evaluate the test-retest variability of ZEST FAST strategy on patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Patients and Methods: This was a multicenter retrospective study. We analyzed 1 eye of 60 subjects: 30 glaucoma patients and 30 patients with ocular hypertension. For each eye we analyzed, 3 visual field examinations were performed with Compass 24-2 grid: 1 test performed with ZEST strategy and 2 tests performed with ZEST FAST. Mean examination time and mean sensitivity between the 2 strategies were computed. ZEST FAST test-retest variability was examined. Results: In the ocular hypertension cohort, test time was 223±29 seconds with ZEST FAST and 362±48 seconds with ZEST (38% reduction, P<0.001). In glaucoma patients, it was respectively 265±62 and 386±78 seconds (31% reduction using ZEST FAST, P<0.001). The difference in mean sensitivity between the 2 strategies was −0.24±1.30 dB for ocular hypertension and −0.14±1.08 dB for glaucoma. The mean difference in mean sensitivity between the first and the second test with ZEST FAST strategy was 0.2±0.8 dB for patients with ocular hypertension and 0.24±0.96 dB for glaucoma patients. Conclusions: ZEST FAST thresholding provides similar results to ZEST with a significantly reduced examination time.

Purpose: To compare within-subject efficacy and safety of intravitreal dexamethasone implant and topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitors in the treatment of retinitis pigmentosa–related cystoid macular edema. Methods: Patients with bilateral retinitis pigmentosa–related cystoid macular edema were treated with intravitreal dexamethasone implant in one eye and topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitors in the contralateral eye. The primary endpoint was a change in central macular thickness. Secondary endpoints were changes in best-corrected visual acuity and microperimetric central retinal sensitivity. Intraocular pressure and other ocular complications were evaluated for safety assessment. Results: Nine patients were recruited for this 12-month follow-up study. Central macular thickness was significantly lower in intravitreal dexamethasone implant–treated eyes than in topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitors–treated eyes at Months 1 and 7, whereas mean best-corrected visual acuity was better in eyes treated with topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitors at Month 12 (borderline significant P = 0.0510). There was no difference in microperimetric sensitivity between the two treatments. Three patients developed ocular hypertension after intravitreal dexamethasone implant. Intravitreal dexamethasone implant showed an effect on the contralateral eye in five of nine patients. Conclusion: Intravitreal dexamethasone implant was more effective than topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitors in reducing retinitis pigmentosa–related cystoid macular edema 1 month after treatment. Corticosteroids can play a key role in the management of retinitis pigmentosa–related cystoid macular edema; however, their routes, timing, and modes of administration should be further explored.

Objective: To evaluate changes in intraocular pressure (IOP) and mean ocular perfusion pressure (MOPP) following intravitreal anti-VEGF injections (IVI) and to assess influencing factors. Methods: In a prospective study, 119 eyes received anti-VEGF IVI, with 60 eyes treated in the supine position and 59 eyes in the seated position. IOP was assessed using an iCare IC200 rebound tonometer before, immediately after, and at 5 and 30 min post-injection. MOPP was calculated at the same time points. Ocular biometric and demographic data were collected to analyze their impact on IOP changes. Results: IOP increased from 15.76 ± 4.34 mmHg at baseline to 49.79 ± 15.73 immidiately post-IVI, then decreased to 29.96 ± 10.55 at 5 min and 21.80 ± 7.36 at 30 min. MOPP dropped from 54.02 ± 10.7 mmHg to 35.7 ± 19.7 mmHg immediately post-IVI, recovering to 40.68 ± 15.9 at 5 min and 51.08 ± 12.2 at 30 min. Supine patients exhibited higher IOP, but maintained higher MOPP compared to seated patients. Only 25% of glaucoma patients returned to baseline IOP within 30 min, compared to 48.9% of non-glaucomatous patients (p = 0.02). Phakic patients have greater IOP changes across time, with significant differences at 5 min ( p = 0.03). Conclusion: IVI induced IOP increases and MOPP decreases are significant but normalized to baseline +2SD within 30 min in 67.77% and 97.52% of patients. Glaucomatous and phakic patients are at higher risk for prolonged IOP elevation, requiring careful management.

Background: Large language models (LLMs) and vision-language models (VLMs) have recently been applied to ophthalmology for patient education, diagnosis, and surgical decision support. Their ability to generate, interpret, and synthesize medical information positions them as promising assistive tools in glaucoma care. This scoping review aims to consolidate current evidence on the applications of LLMs and VLMSs in glaucoma, summarizing their tasks, inputs, performance metrics, and limitations to guide future clinical and research developments. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, arXiv, and IEEE Xplore from 2014 to July 2025. Eligible studies included original research and research letters employing LLMs or VLMs/MM-LLMs in any glaucoma-related application, including diagnostic reasoning, image interpretation, patient education, or surgical decision support. Screening and full-text review were independently performed by two reviewers following PRISMA-ScR methodology, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Results: In total, 316 records were identified across five databases, with 27 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. The selected studies focused on three main domains: patient education (n = 11), diagnosis and risk prediction (n = 10), and surgical management (n = 6). Conclusions: Current LLMs serve best as assistive rather than autonomous tools in glaucoma care. They demonstrate strong potential in patient communication and text-based clinical decision support but remain constrained by variable accuracy, limited multimodal integration, and a lack of ophthalmology-specific fine-tuning. Future research should focus on developing domain-trained and retrieval-augmented LLMs, enhancing multimodal (text-image) fusion, ensuring readability adaptation for patients, and establishing ethical and regulatory frameworks for clinical implementation.