Comparison of the Accuracy Between the Z CALC2 Calculator and Barrett Toric Calculator in Toric IOL Calculation

Purpose To compare the accuracy of the Z CALC2 calculator and Barrett toric calculator in toric intraocular lens (IOL) calculation. Methods Eighty-five eyes of 85 patients who underwent uneventful cataract surgery with toric IOL implantation were included. The accuracy was compared between the Z CALC2 calculator and Barrett toric calculator under two calculation modes: using simulated keratometry (SimK) from the IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) for posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA) prediction and employing total corneal astigmatism (total corneal refractive power [TCRP] or measured PCA) obtained from the Pentacam (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH). The centroid of prediction errors, percentage of eyes with prediction errors within ±0.50 diopter (D), mean prediction error, and mean absolute prediction error were calculated. Subgroup analysis was conducted based on the orientation and magnitude of anterior corneal astigmatism and axial length. Results When using SimK, the two calculators with predicted PCA showed comparable accuracy. When employing total corneal astigmatism, the Barrett toric calculator with measured PCA showed a lower centroid error (0.15 vs 0.38 D), a higher percentage of eyes with prediction errors within ±0.50 D (47.1% vs 32.9%, P = .018), and a lower mean prediction error (0.57 vs 0.71 D, P = .033) compared to the Z CALC2 calculator with TCRP in the 4-mm zone. In subgroup analysis, when employing total corneal astigmatism, the Barrett toric calculator with measured PCA exhibited superior accuracy, especially in the with-the-rule and anterior corneal astigmatism of 2.00 D or less subgroups. Conclusions When using SimK, the Z CALC2 calculator and Barrett toric calculator yield comparable accuracy. The Barrett toric calculator with measured PCA may be more recommended when employing total corneal astigmatism. [ J Refract Surg . 2024;40(10):e681–e691.]