Table 5. The methodological quality and synthesis of case series and case reports assessment tool ( N  = 2) .

Domain for evaluating the methodological quality of case reports and case series
	Selection	Ascertainment		Causality		Reporting
	Leading explanatory questions
Reference	Q. 1	Q. 2	Q. 3	Q. 4	Q. 5	Q. 6	Q. 7	Q. 8	Quality score	Risk of bias
Wright et al, 2022 21	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	Fair quality study (7)	Moderate risk
Wollina et al, 2014 32	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	Fair quality study (7)	Moderate risk

Selection: (Question 1). Does the patient(s) represent(s) the whole experience of the investigator (center) or is the selection method unclear to the extent that other patients with similar presentations may not have been reported?

Ascertainment: (Question 2). Was the exposure adequately ascertained? (Question 3). Was the outcome adequately ascertained?

Causality: (Question 4). Were other alternative causes that may explain the observation ruled out? (Question 5). Was there a challenge/rechallenge phenomenon? (Question 6). Was there a dose–response effect? (Question 7). Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur?

Reporting: (Question 8). Is the case(s) described with sufficient details to allow other investigators to replicate the research or to allow practitioners to make inferences related to their own practice?