2000
DOI: 10.1007/bf02967446
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Skin reactions after breast-conserving therapy and prediction of late complications using physiological functions

Abstract: Impairment of sweating may play an important role in skin damage after irradiation. Although glandular tissue is not usually radiosensitive, the results of our functional assessment suggest that sweat glands are more radiosensitive than expected.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
4
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
1
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Also, recovery from the acute phase reaction of radiodermatitis was verified at 1M. According to a previous study by Sekine et al, dTemp for patients 12 months after radiotherapy was 1˚C or higher, and dTemp finally dropped to below 1˚C after 24 months (12). In the current study, dTemp peaked at 6M with TJ in vivo 34: 3013-3021 (2020) consumption and was above 1˚C.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 72%
“…Also, recovery from the acute phase reaction of radiodermatitis was verified at 1M. According to a previous study by Sekine et al, dTemp for patients 12 months after radiotherapy was 1˚C or higher, and dTemp finally dropped to below 1˚C after 24 months (12). In the current study, dTemp peaked at 6M with TJ in vivo 34: 3013-3021 (2020) consumption and was above 1˚C.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 72%
“…There is a possibility that results differ by subjective evaluation (by the investigator or by the time of evaluation); therefore, follow-up of the patient requires an objective evaluation. Some investigators reported an objective assessment for radiation-induced skin reactions; for example, skin blood flow using a laser flow meter [13] [14], skin temperature by thermography [15], electrical resistance analysis [15], skin color by L*a*b* values [16], and moisture analyses by Corneometer® [16].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These non-subjective symptoms were observed in the acute phase and were evaluated by visual inspection and/or palpation. In this study, the severity of each symptom was evaluated qualitatively and in consensus using a 5-point scale (no change [0], minimum [1], mild [2], moderate [3], and severe [4]). Each patient was evaluated by an experienced radiation oncologist who was blinded to the results of the skin biophysical measurements.…”
Section: Qualitative Evaluation and Quantitative Measurements For Thementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The quantitative measures included skin temperature, erythema, pigmentation, and the parameters related to skin barrier function: transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and the skin surface moisture level (capacitance). These biophysical parameters were selected because they were expected to change in response to RD, as noted in previous studies [1][2][3][4][5][6][7]. Irradiated and contralateral non-irradiated areas of skin were measured non-invasively using a Multi-Display Device MDD4 (Courage + Khazaka Electronic GmbH, Cologne, Germany) connected with the following probes: A Corneometer to detect the relative water content of the stratum corneum, measured the capacitance of the dielectric medium; skin hydration was measured in relative units on a scale from 0 to 120 [10].…”
Section: Qualitative Evaluation and Quantitative Measurements For Thementioning
confidence: 99%