Introduction: The incidence of eye trauma during armed conflicts varies from 0.5 to 13.0%. Evolution in warfare tactics has led to anti-personnel mines and various explosive devices, both improvised and manufactured, becoming the main causes of eye combat trauma in all military conflicts. The aim of the work was to analyse the features of providing ophthalmological care for combat injuries in modern military operations. Material and Methods: A retrospective analysis of the medical records of patients with combat eye injuries who underwent examination and treatment in our clinic from 2014 to 2024 was conducted. During the anti-terrorist operation in 2014– 2021, we provided inpatient care to 1155 victims and performed 470 surgical interventions, which comprised 40% of all treated. A total of 530 patients with combat trauma received outpatient care. Since February 2022, in total 8300 patients with eye injuries have been treated in the hospital, 54% of whom required surgical intervention; more than 15,000 victims were consulted. Results: A comparative analysis shows an increase in the severity of injuries since 2022, i.e. since the beginning of full-scale war; first of all, a high rate of combined eye damage with other organs and systems, and an increase in the number of binocular injuries - from 34% in 2014– 2021 to 64% in a later period. The frequency of severe and very severe injuries in 2014– 2021 was 55%, and starting from 2022 – it was – 67%; in 13% of cases, the injury ended in complete destruction of the eye. The main causes of combat eye injuries were damage by shrapnel, debris, and gunpowder gases that fly apart as a result of an explosion. In the structure of penetrating wounds, the most common cases were cases with multiple intraocular foreign bodies (54%), also in eyes with penetrating wounds there were traumatic cataracts of varying severity (47%), hemophthalmos (26%), retinal detachment (20%), prolapse of the inner membranes of the eye (9%), endophthalmitis (6%), and foreign bodies of the deep layers of the cornea (20%). Among surgical interventions in 2014– –2021, primary surgical treatment of penetrating wounds (35%), and combined interventions and vitreoretinal surgery (23%) prevailed. In 2022– 2024, primary surgical treatment of penetrating wounds in the structure of surgical interventions accounted for 28%, and combined interventions and vitreoretinal surgery 34%. Conclusions: Polymorphism of pathological changes in combat eye injuries and their combination with changes in other organs and structures necessitate an individual approach to the type and scope of surgical intervention. Providing assistance to such patients often requires the surgeon to be ready to perform a variety of surgical treatments and make adjustments to the scope of intervention directly during the operation, which is possible only in a highly specialised medical institution.