Background Topical tretinoin cream is the gold standard treatment for skin ageing, particularly photoaging. The purpose of tretinoin peel was to obtain similar results, but in a shorter time, however, there have been few controlled trials on its effectiveness. Objective To compare efficacy and safety of tretinoin 0.05% cream and 5% as a peeling agent on photoaging and field cancerization of the forearms. Methods Clinical trial with therapeutic intervention, prospective, randomized (computer‐generated randomization list), parallel, comparative (intrasubject) and evaluator‐blinded (except for histology and immunohistochemistry), including 24 women (48 forearms) aged over 60 years who have not undergone hormone replacement and categorized as Fitzpatrick skin phototype II or III. The forearms of the participants were randomized for treatment with 0.05% tretinoin cream three nights a week, or 5% tretinoin peel every 2 weeks. The opinion of the participant, severity of photoaging, corneometry, profilometry, high‐frequency ultrasound, histology (haematoxylin–eosin and Verhoeff stainings) and immunohistochemistry (p53, bcl‐2, Ki67 and collagen I) were assessed. Results One participant dropped out. The mean photoaging score reduced 20% and the mean actinic keratosis (AK) count reduced 60% with no difference between treatments. Three efficacy parameters showed opposite effects between the tretinoin treatments (P < 0.05%): (i) thickness of the corneal layer decreased with 0.05% tretinoin and increased by 5%; (ii) dermis echogenicity increased by 0.05% and decreased by 5% and (iii) Ki67 expression increased by 0.05% and decreased by 5%. There was good tolerability for both regimens. Conclusion Tretinoin as a cream 0.05% or peeling (5%) is safe and effective for the treatment of moderate photoaging and forearm field cancerization. The cream was superior in improving ultrasonographic parameters of ageing. Peeling was shown a superior performance in the stabilization of field cancerization.

Meaningful differences in the biophysical characteristics of the extensor and flexor faces of the forearms were detected. Because the non-invasive instrumental measurements correlated with clinical findings, they may represent useful tools to assess efficacy and safety of skin ageing treatments in clinical research.

BACKGROUND: Contact dermatitis is one of the common work-related dermatoses. Among bricklayers, cement can cause both allergic contact dermatitis and primary contact irritative dermatitis. The personal protective equipment (rubber gloves) may favor the development of allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVES: 1) to evaluate the frequency of allergic contact dermatitis among construction workers between January 2005 and December 2009; 2) to determine the major sensitizing agents in the study group; and 3) to compare the data obtained from the construction workers to that of a group of patients who were not construction workers. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patch tests. Patients were separated into two groups: 1) bricklayers and 2) non-bricklayers. RESULTS: Of the 525 patch tests analyzed, 466 (90%) were from non-bricklayers and 53 (10%) from bricklayers. The hands were affected in 38 (61%) of them. 13 patients (24%) had irritative contact dermatitis and 40 (76%) had allergic contact dermatitis. The group of construction workers had a high frequency of sensitization to cement, and 29 (54.7%) had sensitization to rubber vulcanizing agents. 23 patients (43.4%) had sensitization to both cement and rubber. CONCLUSIONS: Among the bricklayers the presence of allergic contact dermatitis to rubber and cement in the same patient is common and demonstrates the importance of the patch test.

Three patients with atopic dermatitis, one boy and two girls, aged between 6 and 17 years, presented eczematous skin, pruritus, scarifications, lichenification and a family history of atopy. During exacerbations, the patients sought emergency care and were prescribed oral corticosteroids for a period of approximately 15 days. Initially, the patients improved but after cessation of therapy or dose reduction, marked worsening occurred with the development of lesions with extreme pruritus, several confluent lesions, scarification and intense exudates, as well as fever and dehydration. The patients' condition was so severe that two were admitted to the allergy unit. The medication was withdrawn and intravenous hydration was administered, together with hydrating skin creams and antihistamine therapy. In addition, weak topical corticosteroids were applied on the most severely affected areas. All three patients progressively improved. We conclude that the patients with atopic dermatitis described herein presented a rebound phenomenon after the use of corticosteroids. We believe that systemic corticosteroids may exacerbate the acute phase of atopic dermatitis, mediated by IgE, accentuating the Th2 pattern in these patients.

The tretinoin peel, also known as retinoic acid peel, is a superficial peeling often performed in dermatological clinics in Brazil. The first study on this was published in 2001, by Cuce et al., as a treatment option for melasma. Since then, other studies have reported its applicability with reasonable methodology, although without a consistent scientific background and consensus. Topical tretinoin is used for the treatment of various dermatoses such as acne, melasma, scars, skin aging and non-melanoma skin cancer. The identification of retinoids cellular receptors was reported in 1987, but a direct cause-effect relation has not been established. This article reviews studies evaluating the use of topical tretinoin as agent for superficial chemical peel. Most of them have shown benefits in the treatment of melasma and skin aging. A better quality methodology in the study design, considering indication and intervention is indispensable regarding concentration, vehicle and treatment regimen (interval and number of applications). Additionally, more controlled and randomized studies comparing the treatment with tretinoin cream versus its use as a peeling agent, mainly for melasma and photoaging, are necessary.

No abstract

No abstract