Z CALC2 计算器与 Barrett Toric 计算器在 toric IOL 计算中的准确性比较。
Comparison of the Accuracy Between the Z CALC2 Calculator and Barrett Toric Calculator in Toric IOL Calculation.
出版信息
J Refract Surg. 2024 Oct;40(10):e681-e691. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20240731-01. Epub 2024 Oct 1.
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%, = .018), and a lower mean prediction error (0.57 vs 0.71 D, = .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. .
目的
比较 Z CALC2 计算器和 Barrett 散光计算器在散光人工晶状体（IOL）计算中的准确性。
方法
纳入 85 例 85 只眼，均行白内障超声乳化吸除术联合散光 IOL 植入术，无并发症。采用两种计算模式对 Z CALC2 计算器和 Barrett 散光计算器的准确性进行比较：使用 IOLMaster 700（卡尔蔡司医疗技术公司）模拟角膜曲率（SimK）预测后角膜散光（PCA）和 Pentacam（欧科路光学仪器有限公司）获得的总角膜散光（总角膜屈光力[TCRP]或测量 PCA）。计算预测误差的质心、预测误差在±0.50 屈光度（D）内的眼比例、平均预测误差和平均绝对预测误差。根据前角膜散光的方向和大小以及眼轴长度进行亚组分析。
结果
当使用 SimK 时，两种预测 PCA 的计算器具有相当的准确性。当使用总角膜散光时，采用测量 PCA 的 Barrett 散光计算器的质心误差较低（0.15 比 0.38 D），预测误差在±0.50 D 内的眼比例较高（47.1%比 32.9%， =.018），平均预测误差较低（0.57 比 0.71 D， =.033），优于采用 TCRP 的 Z CALC2 计算器在 4-mm 区。在亚组分析中，当使用总角膜散光时，采用测量 PCA 的 Barrett 散光计算器的准确性更高，尤其是在规则散光和前角膜散光为 2.00 D 或更小的亚组中。
结论
当使用 SimK 时，Z CALC2 计算器和 Barrett 散光计算器的准确性相当。当使用总角膜散光时，建议采用测量 PCA 的 Barrett 散光计算器。
Zotero 插件