Comparison of minimally invasive to standard temporal lobectomy approaches to epilepsy surgery: Seizure relief and visual confrontation naming outcomes.

The purpose of this study was to systematically examine three different surgical approaches in treating left medial temporal lobe epilepsy (mTLE) (viz., subtemporal selective amygdalohippocampectomy [subSAH], stereotactic laser amygdalohippocampotomy [SLAH], and anterior temporal lobectomy [ATL]), to determine which procedures are most favorable in terms of visual confrontation naming and seizure relief outcome. This was a retrospective study of 33 adults with intractable mTLE who underwent left temporal lobe surgery at three different epilepsy surgery centers who also underwent pre-, and at least 6-month post-surgical neuropsychological testing. Measures included the Boston Naming Test (BNT) and the Engel Epilepsy Surgery Outcome Scale. Fisher's exact tests revealed a statistically significant decline in naming in ATLs compared to SLAHs, but no other significant group differences. 82% of ATL and 36% of subSAH patients showed a significant naming decline whereas no SLAH patient (0%) had a significant naming decline. Significant postoperative naming improvement was seen in 36% of SLAH patients in contrast to 9% improvement in subSAH patients and 0% improvement in ATLs. Finally, there were no statistically significant differences between surgical approaches with regard to seizure freedom outcome, although there was a trend towards better seizure relief outcome among the ATL patients. Results support a possible benefit of SLAH in preserving visual confrontation naming after left TLE surgery. While result interpretation is limited by the small sample size, findings suggest outcome is likely to differ by surgical approach, and that further research on cognitive and seizure freedom outcomes is needed to inform patients and providers of potential risks and benefits with each.
Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Drs. Gross and Willie serve as consultants to Medtronic, Inc. and receive compensation for these services. Medtronic develops products related to the research described in this paper. The terms of this arrangement have been reviewed and approved by Emory University and Washington University in Saint Louis in accordance with their respective conflict of interest policies. No other authors had any conflicts of interest.
(Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)