Quality assessment of case report studies involved in the meta-analysis
| Study | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Q5 | Q6 | Q7 | Q8 |
| Frankel et al 26 | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | U | Y |
| Elkhouly et al 27 | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | U | Y |
| Hashim et al 28 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | U | Y |
| Heidarpour et al 29 | Y | Y | Y | Y | U | Y | U | Y |
| Freire Santana et al 6 | Y | Y | N | N | U | U | N | Y |
| Sharrack et al 30 | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Kumar et al 31 | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Q1: Were the patient’s demographic characteristics clearly described?
Q2: Was the patient’s history clearly described and presented as a timeline?
Q3: Was the current clinical condition of the patient on presentation clearly described?
Q4: Were diagnostic tests or assessment methods and the results clearly described?
Q5: Was the intervention(s) or treatment procedure(s) clearly described?
Q6: Was the post-intervention clinical condition clearly described?
Q7: Were adverse events (harms) or unanticipated events identified and described?
Q8: Does the case report provide takeaway lessons?
N, no; Q, question; U, unclear; Y, yes.