Demographic characteristics and visual outcomes of open globe injuries in a tertiary hospital in Istanbul, Turkey

  • Melih Ustaoglu
  • Murat KarapapakEmail author
  • Semra Tiryaki
  • Ayse Burcu Dirim
  • Ali Olgun
  • Eyup Duzgun
  • Selam Yekta Sendul
  • Delil Ozcan
  • Dilek Guven
Original Article



To evaluate the demographic characteristics and visual outcomes of patients with open globe injury (OGI) in a tertiary hospital in Istanbul, Turkey.


The data of patients admitted with OGI to Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey from January 2012 to December 2017 were reviewed retrospectively, and 100 of the 154 patients were included in the study.


There were 79 (79%) male and 21 (21%) female patients with the average age of 33.7 ± 20.7 (1–83). Presentation of the patients was more frequent in the first 3 days of the week (Monday 20%; Tuesday 17%; and Wednesday 20%) and within working hours (8 a.m.–5 p.m., 71%). The most common injury type was penetrating injury (75%), which was mostly caused by sharp objects (metal objects 32% and broken glass 22.7%). The ocular trauma score (OTS) was significantly higher in patients with penetrating injury and intraocular foreign body injury (p < 0.001), and those results were correlated with better visual prognosis. The patients with penetrating injury among the injury types and zone I injury among the injury zones had the highest final visual acuity. Patients in the age group of 0–14 years had statistically better visual outcome when compared to those in the other age groups (p = 0.003).


The higher initial visual acuity and OTS, penetrating injury, zone I injury and pediatric age are good prognostic factors for OGI. Additionally, scheduling a prepared surgical team and tools in working hours will be beneficial according to the frequency of admissions.


Penetrating injury Perforating injury Globe rupture Intraocular foreign body Ocular trauma score 



This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Kuhn F, Morris R, Witherspoon CD. Birmingham Eye Trauma Terminology (BETT): terminology and classification of mechanical eye injuries. Ophthalmol Clin North Am. 2002;15(2):139–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Negrel AD, Thylefors B. The global impact of eye injuries. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1998;5(3):143–69.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Soylu M, Sizmaz S, Cayli S. Eye injury (ocular trauma) in southern Turkey: epidemiology, ocular survival, and visual outcome. Int Ophthalmol. 2010;30(2):143–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ji YR, Zhu DQ, Zhou HF, Fan XQ. Epidemiologic characteristics and outcomes of open globe injury in Shanghai. Int J Ophthalmol. 2017;10(8):1295–300.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beshay N, Keay L, Dunn H, Kamalden TA, Hoskin AK, Watson SL. The epidemiology of open globe injuries presenting to a tertiary referral eye hospital in Australia. Injury. 2017;48(7):1348–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Karlson TA, Klein BE. The incidence of acute hospital-treated eye injuries. Arch Ophthalmol. 1986;104(10):1473–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McGwin G Jr, Xie A, Owsley C. Rate of eye injury in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123(7):970–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liggett PE, Pince KJ, Barlow W, Ragen M, Ryan SJ. Ocular trauma in an urban population. Review of 1132 cases. Ophthalmology. 1990;97(5):581–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pieramici DJ, MacCumber MW, Humayun MU, Marsh MJ, de Juan E Jr. Open-globe injury. Update on types of injuries and visual results. Ophthalmology. 1996;103(11):1798–803.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rahman I, Maino A, Devadason D, Leatherbarrow B. Open globe injuries: factors predictive of poor outcome. Eye. 2006;20(12):1336–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Agrawal R, Ho SW, Teoh S. Pre-operative variables affecting final vision outcome with a critical review of ocular trauma classification for posterior open globe (zone III) injury. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2013;61(10):541–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kuhn F, Maisiak R, Mann L, Mester V, Morris R, Witherspoon CD. The ocular trauma score (OTS). Ophthalmol Clin North Am. 2002;15(2):163–5 (vi).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Han IC, Puri S, Wang J, Sikder S. Impact of surgeon subspecialty training on surgical outcomes in open globe injuries. Clin Ophthalmol. 2015;9:1807–13.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pieramici DJ, Sternberg P Jr, Aaberg TM, Sr., et al. A system for classifying mechanical injuries of the eye (globe). The Ocular Trauma Classification Group. Am J Ophthalmol. 1997;123(6):820–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kuhn F, Morris R, Witherspoon CD, Heimann K, Jeffers JB, Treister G. A standardized classification of ocular trauma. Ophthalmology. 1996;103(2):240–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schmidt GW, Broman AT, Hindman HB, Grant MP. Vision survival after open globe injury predicted by classification and regression tree analysis. Ophthalmology. 2008;115(1):202–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim JH, Yang SJ, Kim DS, Kim JG, Yoon YH. 14-year review of open globe injuries in an urban Korean population. J Trauma. 2007;62(3):746–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cillino S, Casuccio A, Di Pace F, Pillitteri F, Cillino G. A 5-year retrospective study of the epidemiological characteristics and visual outcomes of patients hospitalized for ocular trauma in a Mediterranean area. BMC Ophthalmol. 2008;8:6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kivanc SA, Akova Budak B, Skrijelj E, Tok Cevik M. Demographic characteristics and clinical outcome of work-related open globe injuries in the most industrialised region of Turkey. Turk J Ophthalmol. 2017;47(1):18–23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kanoff JM, Turalba AV, Andreoli MT, Andreoli CM. Characteristics and outcomes of work-related open globe injuries. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010;150(2):265–9.e262.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kong GY, Henderson RH, Sandhu SS, Essex RW, Allen PJ, Campbell WG. Wound-related complications and clinical outcomes following open globe injury repair. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2015;43(6):508–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chee YE, Patel MM, Vavvas DG. Retinal detachment after open-globe injury. Int Ophthalmol Clin. 2013;53(4):79–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Meng Y, Yan H. Prognostic factors for open globe injuries and correlation of ocular trauma score in Tianjin, China. J Ophthalmol. 2015;2015:345764.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Smith AR, O’Hagan SB, Gole GA. Epidemiology of open- and closed-globe trauma presenting to Cairns Base Hospital, Queensland. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2006;34(3):252–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Soliman MM, Macky TA. Pattern of ocular trauma in Egypt. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2008;246(2):205–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yu Wai Man C, Steel D. Visual outcome after open globe injury: a comparison of two prognostic models—the ocular trauma score and the classification and regression tree. Eye. 2010;24(1):84–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Unver YB, Kapran Z, Acar N, Altan T. Ocular trauma score in open-globe injuries. J Trauma. 2009;66(4):1030–2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Uysal Y, Mutlu FM, Sobaci G. Ocular trauma score in childhood open-globe injuries. J Trauma. 2008;65(6):1284–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gunes A, Kalayc M, Genc O, Ozerturk Y. Characteristics of open globe injuries in preschool children. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2015;31(10):701–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sahraravand A, Haavisto AK, Holopainen JM, Leivo T. Ocular trauma in the Finnish elderly—Helsinki Ocular Trauma Study. Acta Ophthalmol. 2018;96(6):616–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Ophthalmology, Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research HospitalUniversity of Health SciencesIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations