Table 2.

The quality checklist for the included studies.

	JBI critical appraisal tools - checklist for case reports
Study	Were patient’s demographic characteristics clearly described?		Was the patient’s history clearly described and presented as a timeline?	Was the current clinical condition of the patient on presentation clearly described?	Were diagnostic tests or assessment methods and the results clearly described?	Was the intervention(s) or treatment procedure(s) clearly described?	Was the post-intervention clinical condition clearly described?	Were adverse events (harms) or unanticipated events identified and described?	Does the case report provide takeaway lessons?	Overall appraisala
Fujii et al.37	Yes		No	Unclear	Unclear	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Included
Komaki et al.23	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes, only administration frequency was not reported	Yes, but the time to clinical evaluation was not reported	Yes	Yes	Included
Koga et al.24	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Included
Saito et al.38	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Included
Inoue et al.39	Yes		Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Included

^aThe answer “Yes”, “Unclear” and “No” was marked as 2, 1 and 0 points. The total quality grade was marked: the score of ⩾ 12 as high quality, 12–8 as moderate quality, ⩽8 as low quality.

^bThe answer “Yes”, “Unclear” and “No” was marked as 2, 1 and 0 points. The total quality grade was marked: the score of ⩾ 17 as high quality, 17–12 as moderate quality, ⩽12 as low quality.

JBI, Joanna Briggs Institute.