AIMS: The aim of this study was to look into the current perceptions and awareness about file separation during endodontic treatment among the dental house officers (DHOs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A novel validated questionnaire comprising of 15 close-ended questions was distributed anonymously via Google Forms through email to 1100 DHOs across Pakistan. The questionnaire consisted of two parts: the first component (Section I) collected demographic data and the second component (Section II) investigated the causes of EFS during root canal treatment. Following the completion of socioeconomic information, including age and gender, the DHOs were asked to answer a few questions about the various reasons for endodontic instrument fracture.

RESULTS: A total of 800 responses were recorded, with an effective rate of 72.8%. The majority of the DHOs (p value < 0.001) perceived that endodontic instrument fracture occurred in the posterior (61.5%) and apical third of the canal (50.5%) and in older permanent dentition (67.3%), possibly due to patient anxiety (62%). Better choice of instrument (61.15%), operators' experience (95.3%), knowledge (87.5%), and proper root canal cleaning (91.1%) are believed to be the vital steps in reducing endodontic file separation/fracture. Furthermore, majority of them (p value < 0.001) perceived that stainless steel was a superior alloy for filing instruments. Manual files tend to be more prone to fractures due to repeated use than rotary files.

METHODOLOGY: The literature search was conducted using electronic web databases like PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect and Cochrane with the chosen MeSH key words and data was retrieved until May 2023. Further to perform the statistical analysis, R v 4.3.1 software with "meta", 'metafor" "metaviz" " ggplot2" package was used, and results were represented by odds ratios (OR) and the percentage of forest plots along a 95 per cent confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS: The total number of studies meeting the inclusion criteria was 13; these studies were conducted on mandibular first premolar using Micro-CT; the total sample size was 1817. To scan the sample, an X-ray micro-focus CT system (Siemens Inveon CT, Erlangen, Germany) was used in four studies and seven different machines were used in the respective studies. Mimics 10.01 software (Materialize, Leuven, Belgium) and NRecon v.1.6.9 software (Bruker, Kontich, Belgium) were commonly operated. The minimum and maximum voxel size ranges between 11.94 and 50 μm. Vertucci's classification was frequently used (9), while one study applied Ahmed et al. and Vertucci's classification.