Pulpitis - IrreversibleNCT07306533
Effect of Menstrual Phase on the Anesthetic Efficacy
A study testing Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block in people with Pulpitis - Irreversible, run by Jamia Millia Islamia at 1 site in India.
Trial 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. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 45 years, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Pulpitis - Irreversible
- What is being tested?
- Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 150 participants
- Where
- 1 siteIndia
- Study dates
- 11 Sep 2025to 20 Jan 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 45 years
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- 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 informed consent. Exclusion Criteria
- Use of oral contraceptives or hormonal therapy.
Show all 11Show fewer
- 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.
Who cannot join
None listed.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
India1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Faculty of Dentistry, JMI
New Delhi, Delhi(दिल्ली), 110025
Vivek Aggarwal, 09818188358, vaggarwal@jmi.ac.in
vaggarwal@jmi.ac.in
About this study
Official title: Effect of Menstrual Phase on the Anesthetic Efficacy of Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block in Patients With Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis in Mandibular Molars
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?
Read more
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
- To categorize patients according to their menstrual cycle phase.
- To assess anesthetic success following IANB during each menstrual phase.
- To compare success rates across phases to identify significant differences.
- 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.
- Conditions
- Pulpitis - Irreversible
- Being tested
- Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block
- Keywords
- IANB, pulpitis, anesthesia
- Medical subject headings
- Pulpitis
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Inferior Alveolar Nerve BlockProcedure or surgery
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).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block | Experimental | 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). Receives: Procedure: Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
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.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 10 months, success will be evaluated after 5 minutes of administrtion if IANB.
Intraoperative pain
The intraoperative pain shall be measured using a 170mm HP visual anlouge scale.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 10 months, success will be evaluated during the treatment.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted29 Dec 2025
- Study start11 Sep 2025
- Primary completion15 Jan 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion20 Jan 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Pulpitis - IrreversibleStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 150 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Jamia Millia Islamia
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Dr. Vivek Aggarwal, Jamia Millia Islamia
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07306533
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Menstrual Phase
- Status last verified
- Oct 2026
- First submitted
- 12 Dec 2025
- Last updated
- 30 Oct 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- 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.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 30 Oct 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effect of Menstrual Phase on the Anesthetic Efficacy of Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block in Patients With Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis in Mandibular Molars
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07306533
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Menstrual Phase
- Conditions
- Pulpitis - Irreversible
- Keywords
- IANB, pulpitis, anesthesia
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 150 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Jamia Millia IslamiaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 11 Sep 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 15 Jan 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 20 Jan 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 29 Dec 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
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
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
- To categorize patients according to their menstrual cycle phase.
- To assess anesthetic success following IANB during each menstrual phase.
- To compare success rates across phases to identify significant differences.
- 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.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block | Experimental | Procedure: Inferior Alveolar Nerve BlockPatients 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). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 45 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (11 listed)
- 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 informed consent. Exclusion Criteria
Key exclusion criteria (0 listed)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Inferior Alveolar Nerve BlockThe 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 or surgery | Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block |
Primary outcome
Anesthetic success
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 10 months, success will be evaluated after 5 minutes of administrtion if IANB.
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.
Intraoperative pain
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 10 months, success will be evaluated during the treatment.
The intraoperative pain shall be measured using a 170mm HP visual anlouge scale.
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 30 Oct 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: 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.
Related trials for Pulpitis - Irreversible
Recruiting
Effect of Cryotherapeutic and Nanotherapeutic Sodium Hypochlorite on Post-Operative Endodontic Pain.
Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis, Symptomatic Apical Periodontitis
Not yet recruiting
Post-operative Pain and Clinical Outcome After Single-cone Obturation With a Calcium Silicate-based Versus Epoxy Resin Sealer
Post Operative Pain, Acute, Irreversible Pulpitis (Toothache)
Not yet recruitingPhase 3
Submucosal Cryotherapy and Anti-inflammatory Drugs for Postoperative Pain Following Root Canal Treatment in Maxillary Molars
Pulpitis
Recruiting
Intraligamentary vs Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block for Pulpitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis (SIP), Dental Pain
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Cost-Effectiveness of Upfront Supplemental Anaesthesia in Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis
Irreversible Pulpitis, Anesthesia, Local
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block in people with Pulpitis - Irreversible, run by Jamia Millia Islamia at 1 site in India.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 11 inclusion and 0 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 30 Oct 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in India. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Vivek Aggarwal, MDS (+919818188358, vaggarwal@jmi.ac.in), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Anesthetic success (time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 10 months, success will be evaluated after 5 minutes of administrtion if IANB.). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 30 Oct 2026.