La pupilometría se ha convertido en una herramienta de gran interés en las Ciencias de la Visión. Hasta el momento, solo unos pocos estudios han explorado la relación entre el reflejo pupilar y el consumo de drogas. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la aplicabilidad de la pupilometría dinámica mesópica como método objetivo para la detección de niveles dealcoholemia por encima del límite legal. Se utilizó un diseño de caráctercuasi-experimental, con 19 voluntarios participando en dos condiciones (pre y post ingesta de alcohol). En la sesión con alcohol, los participantesconsumieron 27.5 ml de alcohol en intervalos de 60 minutos durante 4 horas. Se llevaron a cabo registros de pupilometría mediante el Power Refractor II, utilizándose cuatro tipos de estimulación lumínica: blanca (5600 K), azul (450 nm), verde (510 nm) y roja (600 nm). El diámetro basal aumentó significativamente a partir de concentraciones de alcohol en aire espirado iguales o mayores de 0.25 mg/l. Además, el valor de la amplitud de constricción para la luz roja también ofreció diferencias significativas entre las dos condiciones. Estos resultados resultan prometedores en la búsqueda de nuevos métodos de detección de niveles de alcoholemia no permitidos al volante. En este estudio se demuestra que el incremento del diámetro basal y la amplitud pupilar pueden ser utilizados como indicador del nivel de consumo de alcohol. Son necesarios más estudios para validar éste y otros métodos de diagnóstico complementarios a las actuales pruebas de alcoholemia y de consumo de sustancias psicotropas.

(1) Background: Ocular exposure to intense light or long-time exposure to low-intensity short-wavelength lights may cause eye injury. Excessive levels of blue light induce photochemical damage to the retinal pigment and degeneration of photoreceptors of the outer segments. Currently, people spend a lot of time watching LED screens that emit high proportions of blue light. This study aims to assess the effects of light emitted by LED tablet screens on pigmented rat retinas with and without optical filters. (2) Methods: Commercially available tablets were used for exposure experiments on three groups of rats. One was exposed to tablet screens, the other was exposed to the tablet screens with a selective filter and the other was a control group. Structure, gene expression (including life/death, extracellular matrix degradation, growth factors, and oxidative stress related genes), and immunohistochemistry in the retina were compared among groups. (3) Results: There was a reduction of the thickness of the external nuclear layer and changes in the genes involved in cell survival and death, extracellular matrix turnover, growth factors, inflammation, and oxidative stress, leading decrease in cell density and retinal damage in the first group. Modulation of gene changes was observed when the LED light of screens was modified with an optical filter. (4) Conclusions: The use of short-wavelength selective filters on the screens contribute to reduce LED light-induced damage in the rat retina.

Background: Rooms illuminated by “black light” (<400 nm wavelength) has become popular, but there is not enough scientific evidence to support its implementation. This study aims to assess the effects of violet light (392 nm) on the circadian rest–activity rhythm and the visual system through animal experimentation. Materials and results: Five groups of four mice were exposed to different white light, violet light, and dark periods, and their circadian rhythm was analyzed by measuring the circadian period using rest–activity cycles. Electroretinographic recordings and structural analysis of the retina were also performed on experimental animals. Results: Our study demonstrates that mice present normal circadian activity during exposure to violet light, taking rest not only under white light but under violet lighting periods. However, mice suffered a decrease in electrical retinal response after exposure to violet light as measured by electroretinography. Nevertheless, no structural changes were observed in the retinas of the animals under different lighting conditions. Conclusions: Violet light elicits circadian rest–activity rhythm in mice but alters their visual function, although no structural changes are observed after short periods of violet light exposure.

Background/Objectives: Enhanced monofocal and non-diffractive extended depth-of-focus (EDoF) intraocular lenses (IOLs) aim to improve intermediate vision while maintaining contrast sensitivity. However, direct comparative evidence under both photopic and mesopic conditions remains limited. This study prospectively compared the visual performance of two enhanced monofocal IOLs (Tecnis^® Eyhance^™ and ISOPure^®) and one non-diffractive EDoF IOL (AcrySof^® IQ Vivity^™). Methods: Sixty patients undergoing bilateral cataract surgery were implanted with one of three IOL groups (n = 20 each). Patients were assigned to one of three IOL groups based on preoperative consultation and clinical indications. One month postoperatively, monocular corrected distance (CDVA), distance-corrected intermediate (DCIVA), and near visual acuity (DCNVA) were measured under photopic and mesopic conditions. Photopic defocus curves, contrast sensitivity under photopic and mesopic conditions and correlation between pupil diameter and visual acuities were also assessed. Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable among groups. Under photopic conditions, Vivity^™ achieved significantly better UDVA, DCIVA and DCNVA than both Eyhance^™ and ISOPure^®. Under mesopic conditions, distance acuity did not differ significantly, but Vivity™ showed superior DCIVA and DCNVA. Defocus curves demonstrated a broader functional range of vision with Vivity™, while Eyhance^™ and ISOPure^® showed nearly overlapping profiles. Contrast sensitivity was similar among all IOLs under both lighting conditions, with no statistically significant differences. Conclusions: The non-diffractive EDoF AcrySof^® IQ Vivity^™ provided a wider and more functional depth-of-focus than the enhanced monofocal lenses evaluated, without compromising contrast sensitivity. Eyhance^™ and ISOPure^® offered comparable performance, with good distance vision and modest depth-of-focus extension. All three IOLs maintained CS levels comparable to those typically reported for standard monofocal IOLs under both photopic and mesopic illumination, indicating no clinically relevant contrast penalty.

(1) Background: In mesopic lighting conditions, or under adverse environmental circumstances, visual information is reduced, which increases the risk of traffic accidents. This effect could be reduced with a precise evaluation of the visual function under mesopic conditions, but it is difficult to replicate in clinics. This study aims to develop an easy-to-adopt method to evaluate mesopic visual acuity (VA) in drivers. (2) Methods: Prospective and observational study in drivers. logMAR mesopic VA was compared with photopic VA measured under different combinations of contrast charts and filters to find the combination that responds best to mesopic conditions. (3) Results: Fifty-six drivers were examined. The best correlation was found with an 80% density filter and a Weber contrast chart of 20%. The logMAR VA for this combination was 0.01 ± 0.11, which was close to the mesopic VA values (0.01 ± 0.12). The difference between both logMAR VA was 0.00 ± 0.06 (R = 0.86; p ≤ 0.001; ICC = 0.86). (4) Conclusions: The use of 20% contrast optotypes and the interposition of an 80% filter under photopic conditions provide VA values similar to those measured under mesopic lighting conditions, making this simple system a good predictor of mesopic VA values.