Background: Glaucoma, a leading cause of blindness worldwide, can be managed surgically when medical treatments are insufficient. Trabecular meshwork (TM)-based micro-invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) has emerged as a less invasive surgical approach to lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) and managing glaucoma. Methods: This narrative review synthesizes the scientific literature and trials on TM-based MIGS techniques, including trabecular micro-bypass stents, goniotomy and trabeculotomy procedures, electrocautery and laser-based approaches, and ab interno canaloplasty. Among these techniques, efficacy, pivotal clinical trials, medication reduction, safety profiles, complications, and determinants of surgical success were examined. Results: While all TM-based MIGS devices assessed achieved meaningful IOP reduction compared with trabeculectomies, there was no consensus on which TM-based MIGS technique yielded the best outcomes. TM-based MIGS had a good safety profile compared with traditional glaucoma surgeries. Common postoperative complications included transient hyphema, corneal edema, and anterior chamber inflammation. Ultimately, the success of TM-based MIGS procedures depended on many factors, including surgical technique, device type, and patient-specific factors. Conclusions: TM-based MIGS are an effective and safe surgical management option for eligible glaucoma patients requiring moderate IOP reduction. Future research should focus on the long-term outcomes of MIGS procedures, compare MIS devices, and explore the mechanistic and histopathological changes induced by MIGS.

Ocular tumours are detrimental to quality of life and survival. The diagnostic capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI) have increased in the past decade. This systematic review aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of AI models across external, anterior segment, and posterior segment ocular tumours. A systematic literature search of Ovid Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library was performed for studies on AI in ocular tumour diagnosis published from January 2000 to January 2025. Quantitative outcomes were diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Findings were synthesized using descriptive statistics. The QUADAS-2 tool assessed the risk of bias and applicability. Of the 1 947 studies screened, 23 studies were included and categorized as external ocular tumour diagnosis (n = 12), anterior segment tumour diagnosis (n = 2), posterior ocular tumour diagnosis (n = 8), or general ocular tumour diagnosis (n = 1). The main AI models used were DenseNet (n = 4) and ResNet models (n = 3). Weighted mean AI accuracy was 91.4% (81.8% to 98.3%) for external ocular tumour diagnosis, 89.8% (78.1% to 99.0%) for posterior segment ocular tumour diagnosis, and 98.5% for anterior segment tumour diagnosis in the only reporting study. Of the 10 studies comparing AI diagnostic accuracy with physicians, 2 reported significantly higher diagnostic accuracy among ophthalmologists (p < 0.05). Quality assessment demonstrated low or unclear risk of bias and applicability concerns in 69.5% of studies. AI tools are a potential avenue for efficient and accurate ocular tumour diagnosis. Further studies comparing ophthalmologists' diagnostic performance to AI diagnostic performance are needed.

Background/Objectives: Inherited retinal diseases (IRDs) represent a group of rare conditions characterized by significant clinical and genetic heterogeneity. Historically, the diagnosis of these conditions relied primarily on clinical presentation and imaging techniques. This literature review aims to discuss the current state of progress and ongoing challenges in applying precision medicine approaches to IRDs and to examine how advances in genetic testing have transformed diagnostics and opened new therapeutic avenues. Methods: This review examines the application of genetic testing methods to IRDs, with particular focus on next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies. The review also evaluates current patient selection protocols that combine genetic confirmation, retinal structural evaluation, and detailed genetic counselling to achieve optimal therapeutic outcomes. Results: The implementation of NGS has significantly enhanced diagnostic capabilities for IRDs by enabling precise identification of specific genetic mutations. This advancement has paved the way for targeted therapeutic strategies, exemplified by Luxturna for RPE65-related IRDs. However, several barriers to broader adoption of precision medicine persist, including high costs, varied access to services, and complexities in interpreting genetic variants. Conclusions: While the continued development of innovative therapeutic modalities offers promise for expanding treatment options for IRDs, fully harnessing the potential of current and emerging therapeutic technologies requires addressing existing economic, technological, educational, and infrastructural challenges.

Precis: This systematic review and meta-analysis found iCare rebound tonometry had significantly lower IOP readings compared to GAT across adult populations, with high heterogeneity and low certainty of evidence precluding definitive conclusions regarding iCare and GAT agreement Purpose: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively evaluate the concordance between iCare tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) for intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement in adult patients commonly encountered in routine clinical practice. Methods: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and CENTRAL were searched from January 2015 to October 2025. Included studies quantitatively compared in-clinic iCare tonometry with GAT in adults (mean differences, limits of agreement, or intra-class correlation coefficient). Three-level random-effects meta-analysis pooled mean difference in IOP measurements for iCare minus GAT. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Quality Assessment for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 checklist. Results: Thirty-three studies were included in the systematic review, and 31 studies in the meta-analysis. The pooled mean difference for iCare minus GAT IOP measurement in 5,593 eyes was -0.51 mmHg (95% CI -0.96 to -0.06 mmHg, I ² =97.65%, P =0.03). Subgroup analysis demonstrated insignificant pooled mean differences (QM(3)=0.26, P =0.86) across the different iCare models, with values of -0.96 mmHg for IC100, -0.64 mmHg for IC200, -0.39 mmHg for TA01i, and -0.36 mmHg for the iCare Pro. Most studies had low or unclear risk of bias and applicability concerns. Conclusions: iCare tonometry had lower readings than GAT on average, but high heterogeneity and wide limits of agreement suggest that measurements are not directly interchangeable across clinical settings or individual patients.