Laser Interstitial Thermal Therapy Versus Open Resective Surgery for Nontumoral Epilepsy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies Publisher Pubmed



Maroufi SF ; Fallahi MS ; Amirkhani N ; Arani PD ; Theodore JN ; Cohengadol AA ; Sheehan JP ; Van Gompel JJ
Source: Journal of Neurosurgery Published:2026

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Epilepsy affects nearly 50 million individuals worldwide, with one-third of cases resistant to antiseizure medications. For these patients, surgical intervention offers a potential path to seizure freedom. While resective surgery has been the gold standard, laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LITT versus resective surgery in patients with nontumoral epilepsy. METHODS A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, including studies comparing seizure freedom rates, complications, and procedural outcomes between LITT and open surgery in nontumoral epilepsy. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 389 LITT and 557 open surgery patients with varying epilepsy etiologies, including temporal lobe epilepsy, focal cortical dysplasia, and tuberous sclerosis. Statistical analysis was performed using a random-effects model to assess seizure freedom, complications, and reoperation rates. RESULTS Open surgery demonstrated higher rates of complete seizure freedom, although not reaching significance (68.1% vs 53.7%, RR 0.81, p = 0.07). This outcome was sensitive to influential analysis and reached significance in the epileptogenic zone–directed resection subgroup analysis. Although adequate seizure freedom was comparable between the groups (LITT: 63.0% vs open: 74.0%, RR 0.90, p = 0.11), the open surgery group had higher rates of control in the pediatric and non–temporal lobe epilepsy subgroups. Complication rates were significantly higher in the open surgery group (30.0% vs 18.3%, RR 0.55, p < 0.01). LITT patients had significantly shorter hospital stays (3.4 vs 6.8 days, standardized mean difference −0.93, p < 0.01). Reoperation rates were comparable between groups (13.1% for LITT vs 13.4%, RR 1.59, p = 0.26). CONCLUSIONS While LITT offers a less invasive approach with reduced hospitalization and morbidity, open surgery remains slightly superior in achieving long-term seizure freedom. Patient selection remains critical, and further studies are needed to refine decision-making criteria based on epilepsy subtype and lesion characteristics. ©AANS 2026, except where prohibited by US copyright law.