Multi parametric biophysical assessment of treatment effects on xerotic skin.
Journal
Skin health and disease
ISSN: 2690-442X
Titre abrégé: Skin Health Dis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9918227353706676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2021
Jun 2021
Historique:
received:
21
12
2020
revised:
10
02
2021
accepted:
16
02
2021
entrez:
6
6
2022
pubmed:
21
3
2021
medline:
21
3
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Topical moisturizing products are widely used to alleviate the problems associated with xerotic skin. Their use affects many properties of the stratum corneum (SC) in a complex and interrelated manner. The range of measurement techniques available to the researcher has increased in recent years. However, few studies have looked for correlations between the different techniques for assessing how aspects of xerotic skin change over time as a result of topical moisturizer usage. A 3-week in vivo study using an oil-in-water based moisturizing product and an untreated site was conducted to determine the clinical significance of and any correlations between a range of different approaches for the measurement of skin lipid content and also skin hydration and visual grading of dry skin. A range of traditional and more recently developed skin measurement techniques have been used to examine a variety of SC properties in normal and xerotic skin during topical moisturizer usage. In vivo confocal Raman spectroscopy and analysis of SC lipids from tape strips both showed an increase in SC lipid level and organization after 3 weeks of moisturizer usage on xerotic skin. Hydration, measured both optically and electrically, also increased and skin barrier function improved, with strong correlations between the different measures of dryness being observed. Strong correlations were observed between the skin measurements for lipid assessment and skin hydration with regard to the assessment of xerotic skin, providing valuable new information for future in vivo clinical research into dry and atopic skin.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Topical moisturizing products are widely used to alleviate the problems associated with xerotic skin. Their use affects many properties of the stratum corneum (SC) in a complex and interrelated manner. The range of measurement techniques available to the researcher has increased in recent years. However, few studies have looked for correlations between the different techniques for assessing how aspects of xerotic skin change over time as a result of topical moisturizer usage.
Objectives
UNASSIGNED
A 3-week in vivo study using an oil-in-water based moisturizing product and an untreated site was conducted to determine the clinical significance of and any correlations between a range of different approaches for the measurement of skin lipid content and also skin hydration and visual grading of dry skin.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
A range of traditional and more recently developed skin measurement techniques have been used to examine a variety of SC properties in normal and xerotic skin during topical moisturizer usage.
Results
UNASSIGNED
In vivo confocal Raman spectroscopy and analysis of SC lipids from tape strips both showed an increase in SC lipid level and organization after 3 weeks of moisturizer usage on xerotic skin. Hydration, measured both optically and electrically, also increased and skin barrier function improved, with strong correlations between the different measures of dryness being observed.
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
Strong correlations were observed between the skin measurements for lipid assessment and skin hydration with regard to the assessment of xerotic skin, providing valuable new information for future in vivo clinical research into dry and atopic skin.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35664981
doi: 10.1002/ski2.21
pii: SKI221
pmc: PMC9060006
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e21Informations de copyright
© 2021 Bayer Consumer Care AG. Skin Health and Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
H. Stettler and R. de Salvo are employees of Bayer Consumer Care AG. P. Blenkiron and B. Lu are employees of Bayer Healthcare SAS. J. M. Crowther and A. Boxshall are consultants who have worked with Bayer Consumer Care AG and Bayer Healthcare SAS. M. Brandt, S. Laing, N. Hennighausen, and S. Bielfeldt are employees of proDERM GmbH where the study was carried out.
Références
Arch Dermatol Res. 1997 Aug;289(9):506-13
pubmed: 9341970
Biochim Biophys Acta. 2008 Jun;1778(6):1517-24
pubmed: 18406341
Br J Dermatol. 1997 Dec;137(6):934-8
pubmed: 9470910
Skin Pharmacol Physiol. 2006;19(4):207-15
pubmed: 16679823
Skin Pharmacol Physiol. 2004 Sep-Oct;17(5):246-57
pubmed: 15452411
J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2011 Sep;4(9):22-42
pubmed: 21938268
Curr Probl Dermatol. 2018;54:166-172
pubmed: 30130784
J Invest Dermatol. 1991 Apr;96(4):523-6
pubmed: 2007790
J Dermatolog Treat. 2017 Mar;28(2):173-180
pubmed: 27425824
J Pharmacol Sci. 2011;115(2):230-234
pubmed: 32272541
Int J Cosmet Sci. 2017 Jun;39(3):284-291
pubmed: 27731889
Int J Cosmet Sci. 2021 Apr;43(2):191-200
pubmed: 33278031
J Dermatolog Treat. 2017 Dec;28(8):766-773
pubmed: 28503966
Acta Derm Venereol. 1999 Jan;79(1):49-51
pubmed: 10086859
Br J Dermatol. 2000 Sep;143(3):524-31
pubmed: 10971324
Int J Cosmet Sci. 2017 Oct;39(5):572-578
pubmed: 28699214
Br J Dermatol. 2007 Mar;156(3):492-8
pubmed: 17300239
Biopolymers. 2007 Mar;85(4):359-69
pubmed: 17143858
Med Biol Eng Comput. 1977 May;15(3):209-18
pubmed: 195148
Acta Derm Venereol. 2003;83(2):93-7
pubmed: 12735635
Arch Dermatol Res. 1996 Jun;288(7):383-90
pubmed: 8818186
J Dermatolog Treat. 2021 Nov;32(7):721-729
pubmed: 31865821
Biochem J. 2017 Jul 11;474(14):2489-2508
pubmed: 28341808
Biochim Biophys Acta. 2014 Mar;1841(3):295-313
pubmed: 24252189
Acta Derm Venereol. 2007;87(1):4-8
pubmed: 17225007
Arch Dermatol. 1991 Sep;127(9):1375-82
pubmed: 1892407
Skin Res Technol. 2003 Nov;9(4):343-7
pubmed: 14641885
Contact Dermatitis. 2001 Feb;44(2):123-5
pubmed: 11205397
Skin Pharmacol Physiol. 2008;21(1):39-45
pubmed: 18025807
Int J Cosmet Sci. 2006 Oct;28(5):343-7
pubmed: 18489298
Skin Res Technol. 2012 Aug;18(3):316-23
pubmed: 22092664
Skin Res Technol. 1995 Aug;1(3):109-14
pubmed: 27328437
Int J Dermatol. 2013 Aug;52(8):999-1004
pubmed: 23786503
Skin Res Technol. 2018 Aug;24(3):351-358
pubmed: 29923639
J Invest Dermatol. 2003 May;120(5):750-8
pubmed: 12713576
Skin Res Technol. 2013 Feb;19(1):e259-72
pubmed: 22672064
Skin Res Technol. 2001 Nov;7(4):209-13
pubmed: 11737814
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2005 Nov;19(6):672-88; quiz 686-7
pubmed: 16268870
Int J Cosmet Sci. 2017 Aug;39(4):366-372
pubmed: 28337779
Front Med (Lausanne). 2019 May 17;6:98
pubmed: 31157225
Br J Dermatol. 2008 Sep;159(3):567-77
pubmed: 18616783
J Invest Dermatol. 2005 Jun;124(6):1099-110
pubmed: 15955083
Int J Cosmet Sci. 2002 Aug;24(4):241-5
pubmed: 18498516
Arch Dermatol Res. 1995;287(5):457-64
pubmed: 7625857
Exp Dermatol. 2007 Nov;16(11):891-8
pubmed: 17927571
Br J Dermatol. 2014 Jun;170(6):1248-55
pubmed: 24641443
Dermatol Ther. 2004;17 Suppl 1:6-15
pubmed: 14728694
Arch Dermatol Res. 2013 Mar;305(2):151-62
pubmed: 22987221
Int J Pharm. 2000 Feb 15;195(1-2):189-95
pubmed: 10675696
Acta Derm Venereol. 1999 Nov;79(6):418-21
pubmed: 10598752
J Cosmet Sci. 2011 Jul-Aug;62(4):361-70
pubmed: 21982351
J Invest Dermatol. 2012 Sep;132(9):2215-25
pubmed: 22534876
Dermatology. 1998;197(1):18-24
pubmed: 9693180
Int J Pharm. 2013 Jan 30;441(1-2):192-201
pubmed: 23220080
Int J Cosmet Sci. 2016 Dec;38(6):589-598
pubmed: 27028308