Table 1.

Findings from cohort studies (n=21) elaborating on the prognostic factors of OGI

Study	Study type	Country	Sample size	Age (years)	Gender	Findings (Prognostic factors of OGI)
Toh ZH et al. (2022)[11]	Retrospective	India	791	Mean 23.9±19.4	Male 70.6% Female 29.4%	Initial visual acuity (VA), Zone III injuries, corneoscleral wound, large wound size, presence of post-traumatic infections
Bruce CN et al. (2022)[12]	Retrospective	USA	15	Mean 6.97	NIL	Relative afferent pupillary defect (RAPD), zone of injury
Hoskin AK et al. (2021)[13]	Retrospective	India, Nepal, Singapore, Australia, Argentina, Malaysia, China, Indonesia and USA	746	Median 35.9±20.0	Male 85.8% Female 14.2%	Poor prognosis: female gender, presence of RAPD, eyelid injury
Wang SY et al. (2021)[14]	Retrospective	Malaysia	39	Mean 34.9±21.7	Male 84.6% Female 15.4%	Initial VA, OTS
Mayer CS et al. (2021)[15]	Retrospective	Germany	147	Mean 42.9±22.2	Male 78.2% Female 21.8%	Poor prognosis: posterior segment involvement, retinal/optic nerve involvement Good prognosis: Good initial corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), OGI affecting only Zones I and II
Puodžiuvienė E et al. (2021)[16]	Retrospective	Lithuania	160	Mean 41.9	Male: female ratio 8.4:1	Initial VA, iris dialysis, hypotony, vitreous hemorrhage, vitreous prolapse at presentation
Ng HR et al. (2021)[17]	Retrospective	Malaysia	118	Predominant age group: 21-30	Male 88.1% Female 11.9%	Preoperative VA, presence of RAPD, vitreous loss
Demir M et al. (2021)[18]	Retrospective	Finland	118	Mean 33.4±4.8	Male: female ratio 4.6:1	Poor prognosis: best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) <1/10, ocular trauma score category 1, perforating OGI, wound location of Zone II and III, additional vitreoretinal surgery required, retinal detachment, vitreous hemorrhage, lens damage
Toh ZH et al. (2020)[19]	Prospective	India	42	Mean 22.81 (males), 28.6 (females)	Male 76.2% Female 23.8%	Preoperative VA, involvement of visual axis, hyphema, retinal detachment
Guzmán-Almagro E et al. (2020)[20]	Retrospective	Spain	104	Median 41	Male 79.8% Female 20.2%	Preoperative VA, OTS
He Y et al. (2020)[10]	Prospective	China	53	Mean 46.7±11.4 years in the early surgery group Mean 42.3±10.3 in the late surgery group	Early surgery group – Male 100%; Female 0% Late surgery group – Male 92.0%; Female 8.0%	Good prognosis: early vitrectomy after presentation of OGI
Fujikawa A et al. (2018)[6]	Retrospective	Japan	59	Mean 56.7±21.8 years in the light perception (LP) group; 62.3±21.7 years in the no light perception (NLP) group	Male 66.1% Female 33.9%	Poor prognostic factors: Zone III injuries Globe rupture Poor VA at first visit History of penetrating keratoplasty Retinal detachment Vitreous hemorrhage Dislocation of crystalline lens Good prognostic factor: pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) performed if posterior segment involved
Guven S et al. (2019)[21]	Retrospective	Turkey	633	Mean 24.37±11.1	Male: female ratio 18.6:1	Poor prognosis: OTS category 1, initial VA, zone of injury, additional surgeries (PPV), initial lens damage
Okamoto et al. (2018)[22]	Retrospective	Japan	374	Mean 56.8±22.1	Male 73.5% Female 26.5%	Initial visual acuity, type of injury (rupture), retinal detachment, proliferative vitreoretinopathy
Page RD et al. (2016)[23]	Retrospective	USA	103	Mean 41.8±22	Male 78.1% Female 21.9%	Pre-op BCVA, OTS
Yu M et al. (2015)[24]	Retrospective	China	298	Mean 45.46±17.48	Male 83.56% Female 16.44%	Independent risk factors: initial VA, relative afferent papillary defect (RAPD), zone of injury Other risk factors: vitreous haemorrhage, lens injury, endophthalmitis, hyphema, retinal detachment
Liu X et al. (2014)[25]	Retrospective	China	137	Mean 11.57±4.19	Male 84.7% Female 15.3%	Independent risk factors: poor presenting VA, posterior wound location Other risk factors: younger age at presentation, injuries caused by blunt or missile objects, hyphema, vitreous haemorrhage, and surgical intervention of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) (However, with the advances in technology, PPV has an important role in management of injured eyes and improving visual outcomes.)
Agrawal R et al. (2013)[26]	Retrospective	Singapore	172	Mean 36.67	Male 96.5% Females 3.5%	Poor prognostic factors: poor initial VA, presence of RAPD, posterior extent of wound, vitreous loss, vitreous haemorrhage, traumatic cataract, hyphema IOFB had no impact on final VA regardless of zone of injury
Bauza AM et al. (2012)[27]	Retrospective	USA	148	Mean 35.9±14.3	Male 81.8% Female 18.2%	Poor prognosis: initial VA of NLP, Zone III injury Good prognosis: penetrating injuries have better prognosis than rupture or perforating injuries
Tök OY et al. (2011)[33]	Retrospective	Turkey	313	Mean 32.01±21.04	Male 73.2% Female 26.8%	Initial VA, retinal detachment, vitreous prolapse
Han SB et al. (2010)[28]	Retrospective	Korea	194	Mean 38.2±17.8	Male 82.5% Female 17.5%	Initial visual acuity, presence of retinal detachment, relative afferent papillary defect, and wound length (>10 mm is considered large)