Diego Pichardo‐RojasCésar Bigran Espinosa-CantúAlder Fernando Valenzuela‐RangelLuz Camila Choque-AyalaAldo Barrón‐LomelíErnesto A. Gutierrez-HerreraSonia Iliana Mejía‐PérezPavel S. Pichardo‐RojasVanessa MilaneseLeonardo Rangel-Castilla2026-03-222026-03-22202510.3171/2025.4.jns25386https://doi.org/10.3171/2025.4.jns25386https://andeanlibrary.org/handle/123456789/44060Citaciones: 2Across unmatched studies evaluating focal DRE, ORS showed a higher rate of SF. However, pooled matched-cohort analyses showed no difference between interventions in achieving SF, a trend also noted in the authors' PSM TLE sample. LITT, however, offered significantly shorter LHS and lower CRs. Future prospective studies should match patient populations to control for confounding factors and assess key outcomes, such as postoperative neurocognitive follow-up and quality of life measurements, in order to fully evaluate the risks and benefits of each approach.enMedicineSurgeryConfoundingProspective cohort studyQuality of life (healthcare)Meta-analysisNeurocognitivePsychological interventionMEDLINESignificant differencearticle