Analysis of sensitive skin barrier function: basic indicators and sebum composition

Fan, Linna; Jia, Yan; Cui, Lu; Li, Xin; He, Congfen

doi:10.1111/ics.12442

Cited by 32 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Biao Jiang et al analyzed the lipids on psychological stress‐induced sensitive skin and found that differential lipids were mainly involved in damaging the skin permeability and antimicrobial barrier functions . Fan Linna et al found that sebum secretion in the sensitive skin (SS) group was lower than that in the nonsensitive skin (NS) group, suggesting that the development of SS might be associated with sebum secretion and its specific components . Nojiri H et al found that stimulating the barrier function and improving the ceramide profile could improve the lactic acid sensitivity in sensitive skin .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Skin sensitivity evaluation: What could impact the assessment results?

Chen

Sulian

et al. 2019

J of Cosmetic Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: For the evaluation results of skin sensitivity, such as clinical parameters, stinging test records and biophysical assessments dates might be impacted by many factors, the influence factors need to be further explored, and the skin sensitivity evaluation process and methodology needed distinction and normalization. In this study, we investigated the changes of sensitive skin indexes and lactic acid stinging test results in different seasons, facial regions, skin photo-type, and living habits.Methods: Twenty-four healthy subjects had completed this study. Lactic acid stinging test was performed in different seasons. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL), skin hydration, sebum secretion, and pH were measured in an environment-controlled room. Correlations between stinging responses, skin biophysical parameters, and sensitive skin inducements in different seasons were statistically analyzed.Results: Skin TEWL, hydration, sebum secretion, and pH values on different facial parts were various. Two-way correlation analysis between the results of lactic acid stinging test in different seasons and the sensitivity factors showed differences between summer, autumn, and winter. The mean scores of lactic acid stinging test increased in autumn. Linear regression analysis of skin sensitivity factors in type III and type IV photobiology skin found that the frequency of sleeping time and eating spicy food in the past of week could infect the sensitive skin evaluation dates statistically (P < .05).Discussion/Conclusions: Skin sensitivity assessment results were impacted by seasonal transformation, living habits and customs, and facial regions. These indicted that we should consider above interfering factors when evaluated the skin sensitivity for getting more precise dates. K E Y W O R D Sassessment, lactic acid stinging test, sensitive skin, skin index

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Skin sensitivity evaluation: What could impact the assessment results?

Chen

Sulian

et al. 2019

J of Cosmetic Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After cleaning the face with water and drying gently with paper towels, subjects rested for 30 min in a controlled environment (room temperature at 20–25°C, relative humidity of 50–60%). Afterwards, the following parameters were sequentially measured on the right cheek with the respective device: TEWL values (Tewameter TM 300) first, stratum corneum hydration (SCH) (Corneometer CM 825), sebum content (Sebumeter SM 815), erythema index (Mexameter 18) and skin surface pH values (Skin‐pH‐meter pH 905) . Each measurement was repeated three times, and the average of three readings was taken.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A non-parametric two-independent sample test was used to analyse the significance between groups. ***P < 0.001. values (Skin-pH-meter pH 905) [17,18]. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the average of three readings was taken.…”

Section: Measurement Of Skin Biophysical Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association between lactic acid sting test scores, self‐assessed sensitive skin scores and biophysical properties in Chinese females

Ding

Man

et al. 2019

Intern J of Cosmetic Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundLactic acid sting test (LAST) is a classical method to identify sensitive skin. However, some subjects with self‐perceived sensitive skin are negative for LAST.ObjectiveTo determine whether LAST scores are associated with specific phenotype of sensitive skin.MethodsA total of 292 subjects with self‐perceived sensitive skin were enrolled in this study. The Sensitive Scale was used to evaluate the severity of burning, stinging, itching, tautness, erythema and scaling based on 0–10 scale scores. In addition to the assessment of LAST scores, epidermal biophysical properties were measured using an MPA system.ResultsThe Sensitive Scale scores of stinging, itching, tautness and scaling were significantly different between the LAST‐positive and ‐negative groups. However, burning and erythema scores did not differ between the LAST‐positive and ‐negative groups. LAST scores were positively correlated with the Sensitive Scale scores for stinging, itching, tautness and scaling, but not for burning and erythema scores. Moreover, LAST scores negatively correlated with stratum corneum hydration, but positively with transepidermal water loss (TEWL) rates.ConclusionsLactic acid sting test scores positively correlated with TEWL rates. LAST scores could be used to identify subjects with sensitive skin characterized mainly by stinging and itching, but not those mainly by burning and erythema.

show abstract

“…[5] We speculated that the reason for the paradoxical occurrence of disparate TEWL and slightly different pH with almost the same circadian rhythm of SSL excretion content would be alterations in SSL composition. In this study, lipidomics and established methods from our earlier studies [8][9][10][11][12][13] were used to reveal the variations in the SSL profile through a comprehensive analysis in order to understand the paradox of dramatically different TEWL and decreased pH with almost the same circadian rhythm of SSL excretion content.…”

Section: Questions Addressedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization of circadian human facial surface lipid composition

Jia

Zhou

Huang

et al. 2019

Experimental Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The circadian rhythm is an endogenous clock that governs a wide range of physiological functions. In the skin, rhythmic changes in skin barrier function have been investigated at the physiological level; however, few studies at the molecular level have been reported. Additionally, there is no study on lipidomic profile variations of skin surface lipid (SSL), which could potentially explain the rhythmic changes in skin status. Objectives The SSL profile of healthy young women was analysed to assess SSL variations and to assess the skin status during the circadian cycle. Methods Ultra performance liquid chromatography/quadrupole time‐of‐flight mass spectrometry and multivariate data analysis were performed to assess SSL variations. Results The lipidomic profile showed significant differences with the circadian rhythm. Multivariate data analysis indicated that glycerolipids were the lipids majorly affected by the circadian rhythm. Additionally, in the SSL profile, both the average chain length and the content of free fatty acids (FFAs) were higher at 20:00 than at 08:00. Conclusions The SSL profile significantly varied with respect to the circadian rhythm. The rhythm‐altered triacylglycerol level, FFA chain length and FFA content resulted in rhythmic changes in skin barrier function, including transepidermal water loss alteration and pH variation.

show abstract

Analysis of sensitive skin barrier function: basic indicators and sebum composition

Cited by 32 publications

References 17 publications

Skin sensitivity evaluation: What could impact the assessment results?

Skin sensitivity evaluation: What could impact the assessment results?

Association between lactic acid sting test scores, self‐assessed sensitive skin scores and biophysical properties in Chinese females

Characterization of circadian human facial surface lipid composition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About