ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07306533Updated Oct 30, 2026

Effect of Menstrual Phase on the Anesthetic Efficacy

An interventional study of Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block in Pulpitis - Irreversible, sponsored by Jamia Millia Islamia. Recruiting at 1 site in India. Open to female participants aged 18 Years to 45 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-30.

Sponsored by Jamia Millia Islamia · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 3 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Sep 2025, registered Dec 2025).
  • Started Sep 2025; still recruiting 1 year 2 months later.
Updated Oct 30, 2026Primary completion movedStudy completion movedGo to Updates ↓
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
150
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
18 Years to 45 Years
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

The goal of this observational prospective clinical study is to learn whether the menstrual phase influences the anesthetic efficacy of inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) in female patients aged 20-40 years with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in mandibular molars. The main questions it aims to answer are:

Does the success rate of IANB vary across different phases of the menstrual cycle?

Are certain menstrual phases associated with a higher likelihood of anesthetic failure during endodontic access preparation?

Researchers will compare five menstrual phase groups (menstrual, follicular, ovulatory, luteal, and premenstrual) to see if hormonal fluctuations affect anesthetic success.

Participants will:

Receive a standardized inferior alveolar nerve block using 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine

Undergo cold testing and access cavity preparation to assess anesthetic success

Have intraoperative pain recorded using the Heft-Parker Visual Analog Scale (HPVAS), with menstrual phase information recorded confidentially and blinded to the treating clinician

Read the detailed description

Introduction Pain management is fundamental to the success of dental procedures, particularly in endodontics, where patients often present with severe preoperative pain due to irreversible pulpitis. The inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) is the most frequently employed anesthetic technique for mandibular molars, yet its reliability in inflamed pulpal conditions remains questionable. Numerous studies have documented variable efficacy, with failure rates ranging between 30% and 80%, despite correct technique and the use of appropriate anesthetic agents (1). This unpredictability poses a significant challenge, often necessitating supplemental injections such as intraligamentary, intraosseous, or intrapulpal techniques to achieve adequate pain control.

Traditionally, the reasons for IANB failure in irreversible pulpitis have been attributed to local and central mechanisms. Locally, inflammation-induced acidosis decreases the proportion of anesthetic molecules in their non-ionized, membrane-penetrating form, thereby reducing nerve blockade efficiency (2). Inflammatory mediators, including prostaglandins and bradykinin, also sensitize nociceptors and increase expression of tetrodotoxin-resistant sodium channels, which are inherently less sensitive to lidocaine and other amide anesthetics. At the central level, hyperalgesia and central sensitization amplify nociceptive transmission, contributing to anesthetic resistance (1). Patient-related variables, such as anxiety and fear, further modulate pain perception and anesthetic outcome.

However, even after controlling for these factors, considerable inter-individual variability remains unexplained, suggesting a systemic or constitutional influence. Increasing attention has therefore been directed toward genetic, hormonal, and gender-related factors as potential modulators of anesthetic efficacy.

A large body of literature has established sex-based differences in pain perception. Women consistently report a higher prevalence of pain conditions such as migraine, temporomandibular disorders, and fibromyalgia compared to men (3). Experimental models demonstrate that women often have lower pain thresholds, reduced tolerance to noxious stimuli, and enhanced temporal summation of pain (4). These findings suggest an inherent biological variability in nociceptive processing, which extends to the clinical response to local anesthesia. Indeed, several dental anesthesia studies have observed that women require supplemental injections more frequently than men for comparable procedures (Aggarwal et al., 2009).The underlying mechanism for these sex differences is multifactorial. While psychological and cultural factors may influence pain reporting, biological variables-particularly the role of sex hormones-are now considered central.

The menstrual cycle is characterized by cyclical fluctuations in estrogen and progesterone. These hormones exert significant effects on nociceptive transmission and pain perception at peripheral, spinal, and supraspinal levels.Estrogen has dual, context-dependent effects. It can enhance excitability of nociceptive neurons by upregulating sodium channels and NMDA receptors, thereby facilitating pain (4). Conversely, estrogen also promotes endogenous opioid activity, especially via μ-opioid receptors in the central nervous system, which can increase pain inhibition (5).Progesterone is thought to lower pain thresholds by modulating GABAergic and sodium channel activity. High-progesterone phases, such as the luteal and premenstrual phases, have been associated with increased sensitivity to painful stimuli (4, 5).

Together, these hormonal fluctuations create a dynamic pain response across the menstrual cycle. For example, studies have reported that tolerance to electrical pain stimulation is higher in the luteal phase, while sensitivity to thermal and mechanical pain is increased during the same period (4-6).

Although medical and dental literature directly linking menstrual phases to anesthetic outcomes is limited, there is indirect evidence to suggest such an association. In obstetric anesthesia, variable efficacy of epidural and spinal anesthesia has been reported at different stages of the menstrual cycle, attributed to hormonal modulation of sodium channels and opioid receptor sensitivity (4). In dentistry, anecdotal clinical observations and limited studies suggest that female patients may exhibit reduced anesthetic efficacy during luteal and premenstrual phases, when progesterone levels peak.

Rationale for the Present Study: Given the high prevalence of IANB failure in irreversible pulpitis and the underexplored role of menstrual cycle phases, there is a clear need to systematically investigate this association. Most current anesthetic strategies do not account for hormonal influences, yet understanding these variations could provide a scientific basis for predicting anesthetic efficacy and improving pain management in female patients. By evaluating the success of IANB in different menstrual phases, this study seeks to fill an important gap in dental anesthesia research and contribute to personalized approaches in endodontics.

Aims and Objectives Primary Aim To evaluate the association between menstrual phase and the clinical success rate of IANB in mandibular molars with irreversible pulpitis.

Objectives

  1. To categorize patients according to their menstrual cycle phase.
  2. To assess anesthetic success following IANB during each menstrual phase.
  3. To compare success rates across phases to identify significant differences.
  4. To analyze the potential role of hormonal fluctuations as predictors of anesthetic efficacy.

Materials and Methods Study Design: Observational prospective clinical study. Study Population: Female patients aged 20-40 years presenting with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in mandibular first or second molars.

Grouping

Patients will be divided into five groups based on menstrual cycle phase (day 1 = first day of menstruation):

  • Menstrual: Days 1-5
  • Follicular: Days 6-12
  • Ovulatory: Days 13-16
  • Luteal: Days 17-23
  • Premenstrual: Days 24-28 (Self-reported menstrual phase will be cross-checked with cycle history. Information will remain blinded to the treating clinician.) Intervention All patients enrolled in the study will receive a standard inferior alveolar nerve block using 1.5 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine. The efficacy of anesthesia will be evaluated by two measures. First, pulpal anesthesia will be assessed using a cold test with Endo-Ice. Second, intraoperative pain will be recorded during access cavity preparation using the Heft-Parker Visual Analog Scale (HPVAS). Anesthetic outcome will be classified as either success or failure. Success will be defined as absence of response to cold testing along with no or only mild intraoperative pain (HPVAS ≤ 54 mm). Failure will be recorded when patients exhibit a positive cold test response and/or report moderate to severe intraoperative pain (HPVAS > 54 mm) despite IANB administration.

Sample Size Calculation Assuming an expected difference of \~30% in anesthetic success between phases, with 80% power and 5% significance, minimum 30 patients per group are required. Total sample size: 150 patients.

Statistical Analysis All collected data will first be subjected to descriptive statistical analysis to summarize demographic characteristics such as age distribution and baseline pain scores across the study groups. The association between menstrual phase and the success rate of inferior alveolar nerve block will be evaluated using the chi-square test. To further account for potential confounding variables, including age and baseline preoperative pain intensity, logistic regression analysis will be performed. Statistical significance will be set at a p-value of less than 0.05.

Work Schedule The estimated duration of the study is nine months. The initial six months will be devoted to recruitment of eligible participants and collection of clinical and outcome data. This will be followed by a three-month period dedicated to data analysis, statistical interpretation, and preparation of the study report and manuscript.

02

Conditions studied

  • Pulpitis - Irreversible

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • IANB
  • pulpitis
  • anesthesia
03

In context

Pulpitis

316 studies on the registry are indexed under Pulpitis; 90 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 150 is above the median of 64 across 288 interventional studies indexed under Pulpitis.

Browse Pulpitis studies →

Lead sponsor

Jamia Millia Islamia is the lead sponsor of 12 studies on the registry; 3 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 45 Years
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Female patients aged 20-40 years.
  • Regular menstrual cycles (28 ± 3 days).
  • Diagnosed with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in mandibular molars.
  • Indicated for root canal therapy.
  • Willing to provide . Exclusion Criteria
  • Use of oral or hormonal therapy.
  • Irregular menstrual cycles.
  • Pregnancy or lactation.
  • Systemic disease affecting pain perception (e.g., diabetes, neuropathies).
  • Recent use of analgesics or sedatives (within 24 hours).
  • Allergy to local anesthetics.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

Contraception

Ways of preventing pregnancy. “Highly effective” methods fail less than 1% of the time a year when used correctly — for example an IUD or an implant.

Criteria usually say which methods count and how long to keep using them after the last dose, sometimes for male participants too. Some studies accept a partner’s vasectomy if it was confirmed successful and that person is the participant’s only sexual partner.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
150 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block

    Patients will receive a standard inferior alveolar nerve block using 1.5 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine. The efficacy of anesthesia will be evaluated by two measures. First, pulpal anesthesia will be assessed using a cold test with Endo-Ice. Second, intraoperative pain will be recorded during access cavity preparation using the Heft-Parker Visual Analog Scale (HPVAS). Anesthetic outcome will be classified as either success or failure. Success will be defined as absence of response to cold testing along with no or only mild intraoperative pain (HPVAS ≤ 54 mm).

    Procedure: Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block

Interventions

  • ProcedureInferior Alveolar Nerve Block

    The patients will receive a standard inferior alveolar nerve block using 1.5 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine. The efficacy of anesthesia will be evaluated by two measures. First, pulpal anesthesia will be assessed using a cold test with Endo-Ice. Second, intraoperative pain will be recorded during access cavity preparation using the Heft-Parker Visual Analog Scale (HPVAS). Anesthetic outcome will be classified as either success or failure. Success will be defined as absence of response to cold testing along with no or only mild intraoperative pain (HPVAS ≤ 54 mm).

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Anesthetic success

    The efficacy of anesthesia will be evaluated by two measures. First, pulpal anesthesia will be assessed using a cold test with Endo-Ice. Second, intraoperative pain will be recorded during access cavity preparation using the Heft-Parker Visual Analog Scale (HPVAS). Anesthetic outcome will be classified as either success or failure. Success will be defined as absence of response to cold testing along with no or only mild intraoperative pain (HPVAS ≤ 54 mm). Failure will be recorded when patients exhibit a positive cold test response and/or report moderate to severe intraoperative pain (HPVAS \> 54 mm) despite IANB administration.

    Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 10 months, success will be evaluated after 5 minutes of administrtion if IANB.

  2. Intraoperative pain

    The intraoperative pain shall be measured using a 170mm HP visual anlouge scale.

    Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 10 months, success will be evaluated during the treatment.

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Faculty of Dentistry, JMI
    New Delhi, Delhi(दिल्ली) 110025, India
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — The data collected in this study will be used solely for the purposes outlined in the approved research protocol and for publication in aggregated, anonymized form, without any identifiers that could reveal individual participant information.

Supporting information: Study protocol

Time frame: After 1 year of completion of study

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Updates

2 registry updates since Sep 25, 2026
Primary completion
Mar 10, 2026→Jan 15, 2027
moved 2 times, Oct 8, 2026 – Oct 30, 2026
Study completion
Mar 10, 2026→Jan 20, 2027
moved 2 times, Oct 8, 2026 – Oct 30, 2026
Show all 2 updates
  1. Oct 30, 2026
    Primary completion Oct 15, 2026→Jan 15, 2027
    Study completion Oct 20, 2026→Jan 20, 2027
  2. Oct 8, 2026
    Primary completion Mar 10, 2026→Oct 15, 2026
    Study completion Mar 10, 2026→Oct 20, 2026
    + 1 other change: verification date

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07306533
Lead sponsor
Jamia Millia Islamia
Responsible party
Dr. Vivek Aggarwal (Professor, Jamia Millia Islamia) — Principal investigator
First posted
Dec 29, 2025
Start date
Sep 11, 2025
Primary completion
Jan 15, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Jan 20, 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 30, 2026

Study contacts

Vivek Aggarwal, MDS
Contact
vaggarwal@jmi.ac.in
+919818188358

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion