1. Apfelbaum JL, Hagberg CA, Caplan RA, Blitt CD, Connis RT, Nickinovich DG, et al. Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. Anesthesiology 2013; 118: 251-70.
2. Simon LV, Torp KD. Laryngeal mask airway [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls publishing [updated 2022 Feb; cited 2021 Aug 5]. Available from
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK482184
3. Nakayama S, Osaka Y, Yamashita M. The rotational technique with a partially inflated laryngeal mask airway improves the ease of insertion in children. Paediatr Anaesth 2002; 12: 416-9.
4. Kumar D, Khan M, Ishaq M. Rotational vs. standard smooth laryngeal mask airway insertion in adults. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2012; 22: 275-9. Erratum in: J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2012; 22: 411.
5. Matta BF, Marsh DS, Nevin M. Laryngeal mask airway: a more successful method of insertion. J Clin Anesth 1995; 7: 132-5.
6. Wakeling HG, Butler PJ, Baxter PJ. The laryngeal mask airway: a comparison between two insertion techniques. Anesth Analg 1997; 85: 687-90.
7. Hwang JW, Park HP, Lim YJ, Do SH, Lee SC, Jeon YT. Comparison of two insertion techniques of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: standard versus 90-degree rotation. Anesthesiology 2009; 110: 905-7.
8. Jeon YT, Na HS, Park SH, Oh AY, Park HP, Yun MJ, et al. Insertion of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway is more successful with the 90 degrees rotation technique. Can J Anaesth 2010; 57: 211-5.
10. Park JY, Yu J, Hong JH, Hwang JH, Kim YK. Head elevation and laryngeal mask airway Supreme insertion: a randomized controlled trial. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2021; 65: 343-50.
12. Yun MJ, Hwang JW, Park SH, Han SH, Park HP, Kim JH, et al. The 90° rotation technique improves the ease of insertion of the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway in children. Can J Anaesth 2011; 58: 379-83.
15. Sterne JA, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2019; 366: l4898.
17. Higgins JP, Deeks JJ. Selecting studies and collecting data. In: Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 5.1.0 [Internet]. London: The Cochrane Collaboration [updated 2011 Mar; cited 2021 Nov 25]. Available from
www.handbook.cochrane.org
19. R core Team. A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria [Internet]. [updated 2020 Aug; cited 2021 Oct 1]. Available from
https://www.R-project.org
20. Viechtbauer W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J Stat Soft 2010; 36: 1-48.
23. Mahmoodpoor A, Golzari SE, Hamidi M, Hamidi M, Parish M, Soleimanpour H, et al. Comparison of three methods for laryngeal mask airway insertion in adults: standard, lateral and rotational. J Clin Anal Med 2015; 6: 53-6.
25. Kim HC, Yoo DH, Kim HJ, Jeon YT, Hwang JW, Park HP. A prospective randomised comparison of two insertion methods for i-gel placement in anaesthetised paralysed patients: standard vs. rotational technique. Anaesthesia 2014; 69: 729-34.
27. Brimacombe J, Keller C. The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: a randomized, crossover study with the standard laryngeal mask airway in paralyzed, anesthetized patients. Anesthesiology 2000; 93: 104-9.
28. Cook TM, Nolan JP, Verghese C, Strube PJ, Lees M, Millar JM, et al. Randomized crossover comparison of the proseal with the classic laryngeal mask airway in unparalysed anaesthetized patients. Br J Anaesth 2002; 88: 527-33.
29. Welsh BE. Use of a modified Magill’s forceps to place a flexible laryngeal mask. Anaesthesia 1995; 50: 1002-3.