Near-infrared fluorescence with indocyanine green for minimally invasive hernia surgery: A systematic review and evidence synthesis

Table 2 Quality assessment of the case reports¹

Ref.	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Q5	Q6	Q7	Q8	Total score	Quality rating
Glanzer et al[22], 2021	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	8	High
Kozadinos et al[23], 2021	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	7	Good
Cengiz et al[25], 2017	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	7	Good
Todeschini et al[17], 2024	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	7	Good
Nakashima et al[11], 2022	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	7	Good
Shimada et al[14], 2022	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	7	Good
Nakaseko et al[10], 2023	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	7	Good
Tsuchiya et al[21], 2022	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	N	6	Good
Ryu et al[12], 2016	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	7	Good
Daskalopoulou et al[15], 2018	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	8	High
Yodying[18], 2024	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	7	Good
Atwood et al[31], 2021	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	7	Good
Nakaseko et al[16], 2023	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	7	Good

¹Q1: 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 methods used, and were the results clearly described? Q5: Were 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? Y: Yes; N: No.