SynthesisEpilepsia2026
Neuropsychological outcomes comparing traditional surgical approaches and laser interstitial thermal therapy for refractory mesial temporal lobe epilepsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Epilepsia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Treatment of pediatric epilepsy.Pediatric investigation · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare neuropsychological outcomes following traditional surgical approaches and magnetic resonance-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy (MRgLITT) in patients with drug-resistant mesial temporal lobe epilepsy.
methodsThirty-four studies were included; 24 reported cognitive outcomes following open resection, seven following MRgLITT, and three reported on both procedures. Meta-analyses of proportions, subgroup comparisons, and meta-regressions were conducted across three cognitive domains: verbal memory, visual memory, and naming, stratified by surgical laterality and procedure type.
resultsIn left-sided surgery, verbal memory decline occurred in 36% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 28%-45%) after open resection and 29% (95% CI = 9%-62%) after MRgLITT, with no significant difference (p = .5967). For right-sided procedures, visual memory decline was similar between open resection (16%, 95% CI = 8%-29%) and MRgLITT (19%, 95% CI = 3%-61%; p = .8027). Left-sided naming decline was higher after open resection (43%, 95% CI = 27%-61%) than MRgLITT (9%, 95% CI = 3%-22%; p < .0001), a difference supported in subgroup and meta-regression analyses. Exploratory meta-regression suggested a borderline association between higher seizure freedom and greater naming decline (p = .0508), but MRgLITT retained a protective effect after adjusting for seizure outcomes (β = -1.36, 95% CI = -2.20 to -.51; p = .0016). Regardless of the approach, naming improvement occurred in 27% of patients in each group after right-sided surgery, indicating substantial recovery when the left hemisphere is preserved. SIGNIFICANCE: Verbal memory showed a nonsignificant trend toward better preservation with MRgLITT, whereas visual memory was comparable across approaches. MRgLITT significantly preserved naming after left-sided surgery, offering a clear cognitive benefit over traditional open resection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.