Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 18, 2026
Assessing Early Stage Open-Angle Glaucoma in Patients by Isolated-Check Visual Evoked Potential
Published on: May 25, 2020
The diagnostic yield of the evaluation for isolated unexplained optic atrophy
Andrew G Lee1, Felix Y Chau, Karl C Golnik
1Department of Ophthalmology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics and Veterans Administration Hospital, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA. andrew-lee@uiowa.edu
Purpose:
To report the diagnostic yield for the evaluation of isolated and unexplained optic atrophy.
Setting:
Two tertiary care academic neuroophthalmology clinics.
Design:
Retrospective case series.
Participants:
Patients with optic atrophy.
Methods:
Retrospective review of all charts with the diagnosis of optic atrophy. Included patients were adults with isolated, but unexplained, optic atrophy. Patients were excluded if they were children, had incomplete or inadequate documentation of the findings, had nonneurologically isolated optic atrophy (e.g., other localizing findings), or had a history (e.g., prior neuroimaging study showed a compressive lesion, prior ischemic optic neuropathy) or examination (e.g., central retinal artery occlusion) evidence for an etiology for the optic atrophy.
Main Outcome Measure:
Results of diagnostic evaluation.
Results:
A total of 1110 charts with the diagnosis of optic atrophy were reviewed from the 2 participating institutions (368 from the University of Cincinnati and 742 from the University of Iowa). Of these 1110 charts, 91 (8%) with isolated unexplained optic atrophy were included, and 1019 charts (92%) were excluded. Of 91 included patients, 18 (20%) had a compressive lesion causing optic atrophy, and 73 (80%) cases had no etiology for the optic atrophy on neuroimaging. Of the 18 patients with abnormal imaging (e.g., meningioma, pituitary adenoma, craniopharyngioma) studies, 11 had bilateral and 7 had unilateral optic atrophy. Five of the 18 patients had progressive visual loss, 3 had hemianopic visual field loss, and 11 were younger than 50 years old.
Conclusions:
Patients with optic atrophy in our study typically had historical or examination findings that led to an etiologic diagnosis. Neuroimaging showed an etiology in 20% of patients. Other laboratory testing did not produce an etiologic diagnosis in the absence of a suggestive history or examination. On the basis of our results, we recommend neuroimaging for all patients with unexplained optic atrophy and consideration for directed laboratory studies only.
