That's probably a bad idea. Unless I'm confusing it with a different storage technology, heating flash memory has the not-really-side effect of erasing the data on it. The reason it rejuvenates it is because that also erases most of the effects of wear. (Think writing and erasing on a piece of paper until it's unreadably covered in smeared half-erased pencil residue, then grinding the paper up into pulp and pouring a new sheet of paper.) It can't be worse than nothing, but it's unlikely to be any better.
I'd recommend instead (or at least first) desoldering the component memory chips and trying to read the data off of them directly with a microcontoller (bit-banging whatever protocol the drive uses internally). It's more (and slower and fiddlier) work, but also more likely to get at least some data back.
First, I didn't lose any data but only time when that SSD failed, so going to the extent of desoldering the memory chips isn't necessary. Fortunately, that SSD was only a backup/consolidation from other drives so I still had all that data.
The only reason for suggesting that course of action was out of curiosity, as I recall from old data would sometimes come to 'life' after we erased 2716s, 2732s etc. and then exposed them to excessive heat (it was never intended as a means of unerasing them after we'd exposed them to UV light.
The real issue remains and that's that manufacturers aren't prepared to tell us anything about them and I reckon that's a significant problem.
I'd recommend instead (or at least first) desoldering the component memory chips and trying to read the data off of them directly with a microcontoller (bit-banging whatever protocol the drive uses internally). It's more (and slower and fiddlier) work, but also more likely to get at least some data back.