Determination of visual prognosis in children with open globe injuries

Article metrics



To determine the predictive factors of visual outcomes in children with open globe injury and to give guidance to reduce the incidence of open globe injury.


One hundred and forty eyes of 137 consecutive open globe injury patients, who were treated at the Eye Center of Second Bethune Hospital affiliated with Jilin University between August 2005 and August 2012, were retrospectively analyzed. Data recorded included demographic characteristics, causes of injury, location and extent of injury, presenting visual acuity, detailed ocular anterior and posterior segment evaluations, details of primary and subsequent surgeries, and postoperative complications and outcomes. The follow-up data included the most recent best-corrected visual acuity, complications, and the duration of follow-up.


Of the 137 patients, there were 116 (84.7%) boys and 21 (15.3%) girls. Their ages ranged between 3 and 17 years old (mean=11.57±4.19 years old). Sixty (43.8%) children had a right eye injury, whereas 74 (54.0%) had a left eye injury. Only three (2.2%) children suffered bilateral eye injury. Living utensils, industrial tools, and fireworks contributed to the most common causes of open globe injury. Eighty-one (59.1%) had sharp force injuries, 23 (16.8%) had blunt injuries, and 33 (24.1%) had missile injuries.


Unfavorable visual outcomes were related to a younger age at presentation, poor presenting visual acuity, injuries caused by blunt or missile objects, posterior wound location, hyphema, vitreous hemorrhage, and surgical intervention of pars plana vitrectomy.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1
Figure 2


  1. 1

    Rostomian K, Thach AB, Isfahani A, Pakkar A, Pakkar R, Borchert M . Open globe injuries in children. J AAPOS 1998; 2: 234–238.

  2. 2

    Serrano JC, Chalela P, Arias JD . Epidemiology of childhood ocular trauma in a northeastern Colombian region. Arch Ophthalmol 2003; 121: 1439–1445.

  3. 3

    Tok O, Tok L, Ozkaya D, Eraslan E, Ornek F, Bardak Y . Epidemiological characteristics and visual outcome after open globe injuries in children. J AAPOS 2011; 15: 556–561.

  4. 4

    Alfaro DV, Chaudhry NA, Walonker AF, Runyan T, Saito Y, Liggett PE . Penetrating eye injuries in young children. Retina 1994; 14: 201–205.

  5. 5

    Ference Kuhn DJP . Ocular trauma: principles and practice. Thieme New York: New York, 2010.

  6. 6

    Hill JR, Crawford BD, Lee H, Tawansy KA . Evaluation of open globe injuries of children in the last 12 years. Retina 2006; 26: S65–S68.

  7. 7

    Gupta A, Rahman I, Leatherbarrow B . Open globe injuries in children: factors predictive of a poor final visual acuity. Eye (Lond) 2009; 23: 621–625.

  8. 8

    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): 1798–1803.

  9. 9

    Lee CH, Lee L, Kao LY, Lin KK, Yang ML . Prognostic indicators of open globe injuries in children. Am J Emerg Med 2009; 27: 530–535.

  10. 10

    Pieramici DJ, Sternberg P Jr, Aaberg TM Sr, Bridges WZ Jr, Capone A Jr, Cardillo JA et al. A system for classifying mechanical injuries of the eye (globe). The Ocular Trauma Classification Group. Am J Ophthalmol 1997; 123: 820–831.

  11. 11

    Farr AK, Hairston RJ, Humayun MU, Marsh MJ, Pieramici DJ, MacCumber MW et al. Open globe injuries in children: a retrospective analysis. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 2001; 38: 72–77.

  12. 12

    Sheard RM, Mireskandari K, Ezra E, Sullivan PM . Vitreoretinal surgery after childhood ocular trauma. Eye (Lond) 2007; 21: 793–798.

  13. 13

    Bunting H, Stephens D, Mireskandari K . Prediction of visual outcomes after open globe injury in children: a 17-year Canadian experience. J AAPOS 2013; 17 (1): 43–48.

  14. 14

    Kuhn F, Morris R, Witherspoon CD, Heimann K, Jeffers JB, Treister G . A standardized classification of ocular trauma. Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 240–243.

  15. 15

    Baxter RJ, Hodgkins PR, Calder I, Morrell AJ, Vardy S, Elkington AR . Visual outcome of childhood anterior perforating eye injuries: prognostic indicators. Eye (Lond) 1994; 8: 349–352.

  16. 16

    Sternberg P Jr, de Juan E Jr, Michels RG, Auer C . Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors in penetrating ocular injuries. Am J Ophthalmol 1984; 98: 467–472.

  17. 17

    Al-Mezaine HS, Osman EA, Kangave D, Abu El-Asrar AM . Prognostic factors after repair of open globe injuries. J Trauma 2010; 69: 943–947.

  18. 18

    Entezari M, Rabei HM, Badalabadi MM, Mohebbi M . Visual outcome and ocular survival in open-globe injuries. Injury 2006; 37: 633–637.

  19. 19

    Man CY, 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 (Lond) 2010; 24: 84–89.

  20. 20

    Scott IU, Flynn HW Jr, Azen SP, Lai MY, Schwartz S, Trese MT . Silicone oil in the repair of pediatric complex retinal detachments: a prospective, observational, multicenter study. Ophthalmology. 1999; 106: 1399–1407 discussion 407–408.

Download references


This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [31071222] and the Frontier Interdiscipline Program of Norman Bethune Health Center of Jilin University [2013106023].

Author information

Correspondence to G Su or J Zhao.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Further reading