ABSTRACT
Objective:To evaluate the effects and adverse reactions of external skin care products containing oltides and bio-polysaccharides on epidermaligopep barrier function of sensitive skin.Methods:From December 2019 to July 2020, there were 30 sensitive skin volunteers diagnosed and treated in the dermatology clinic of Beijing Tongren Hospital, including 3 males and 27 females, aged 18-57 years, with an average of 34 years, and the course of disease was 1-10 years, with an average of 5.75 years. They were treated once with products containing oligopeptides and biopolysaccharides on the day of enrollment. Before treatment, 1 week and 4 weeks after treatment, we observed and evaluated through VISIA analysis; skin physiological index measurement, subjective and objective improvement assessment, and product safety were evaluated through questionnaire surveys.Results:The VISIA data showed that the red zone was significantly lower than the baseline, and the data at the 4th week and before treatment were significantly improved ( P<0.05). On skin physiology, the test showed that after treatment, the difference between two follow-up visits and the water content before was statistically significant ( P<0.05). TEWL value after 4 weeks of treatment was significantly improved as compared with the baseline ( P<0.05). During the entire study process, no adverse reactions related to the product occurred. Conclusions:This skin care product containing oligopeptides and biopolysaccharides can increase the water content of the sensitive skin, reduce the water loss through the skin, and improve the skin barrier function. Meanwhile, no server adverse reaction is detected through the whole experiment.
ABSTRACT
Compared with people with non-sensitive skin,people with sensitive skin are more likely to have some undesirable feelings and symptoms in response to stimuli from the external environment,such as itching and pain sensations,and even erythema after chemical stimulation of the skin.Few reviews are related to evaluation methods for sensitive skin in China and other countries.This review introduces subjective,semi-subjective and objective evaluation methods for sensitive skin,summarizes evaluation methods suitable for different types of sensitive skin,and analyzes advantages and limitations of various evaluation methods.
ABSTRACT
Objective To evaluate clinical efficacy and safety of microneedle-mediated intradermal injection with hyaluronic acid for the treatment of sensitive skin.Methods A total of 53 female patients aged 21-54 years and diagnosed with sensitive skin were enrolled from Department of Cosmetic Dermatology,Dermatology Hospital of Southern Medical University from January to June in 2018,and were divided into 3 groups by using a random number generator and a residue-based method:high-pressure jet injection group (n =23) receiving high-pressure jet injection with hyaluronic acid on the right side of the face (treatment side) and high-pressure jet injection with 0.9％ sodium chloride solution on the left side of the face (control side) once every 2 weeks,microneedle injection group (n =15) receiving microneedle-mediated injection with hyaluronic acid on the right side of the face (treatment side)and microneedle-mediated injection with 0.9％ sodium chloride solution on the left side of the face (control side) once every 4 weeks,combination group (n =15) receiving microneedle-mediated injection with hyaluronic acid on the right side of the face (treatment side) and high-pressure jet injection with hyaluronic acid on the left side of the face (control side) once every 4 weeks.All the patients in the above 3 groups received 4 consecutive sessions of treatment.Before the initial treatment and 2 weeks after the final treatment,erythema and skin pore scores were determined on the right and left sides of the face by using VISIA facial imaging system,lactic acid stinging test was performed,and skin sensitivity including severity of itching,dryness,erythema and scaling was evaluated.Two weeks after the final treatment,the overall improvement was evaluated with the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS)by clinicians and patients.Adverse reactions were recorded during and after treatment.Statistical analysis was carried out by using paired t test,Wilcoxon sign rank sum test and chi-square test.Results Two weeks after the final treatment,the improvement of skin pore score in the treatment side was superior to that in the control side in the high-pressure jet injection group (t =2.19,P =0.03),while no significant difference in the improvement of erythema score was observed between the treatment side and control side (t =1.10,P =0.27);in the microneedle injection group,the improvement of erythema and skin pore scores was greater in the treatment side than in the control side (t =2.47,3.02,both P =0.01);in the combination group,the VISIA erythema score in the treatment and control sides was 0.59 ± 0.25 and 0.85 ± 0.31 respectively,the improvement of erythema score in the treatment side was superior to that in the control side (t =5.02,P ＜ 0.01),while there was no significant difference in the improvement of skin pore score between the treatment side and control side (P ＞ 0.05).Two weeks after the final treatment,the severity of itching,dryness and scaling was significantly improved in both the treatment and control sides in the 3 groups compared with those before the initial treatment (P ＜ 0.05),while the severity of erythema was significantly improved only in the treatment side in the microneedle injection group and combination group when compared with that before the initial treatment (Z =-2.236,-2.887,respectively,both P ＜ 0.05).Moreover,both the microneedle injection group and combination group showed significantly decreased severity of erythema in the treatment side compared with that in the control side two weeks after the final treatment (Z =-2.646,-2.887,respectively,both P ＜ 0.05).Two weeks after the final treatment,the positive rate of the lactic acid stinging test significantly decreased in the treatment side compared with that before the initial treatment in the microneedle injection group (x2 =4.821,P =0.028),but showed no significant changes in the other groups (all P ＞ 0.05).No severe adverse reactions were observed during or after the treatment.Conclusion Microneedle intradermal injection with hyaluronic acid can effectively and safely improve erythema,skin pore and sensitive symptoms in patients with sensitive skin.
ABSTRACT
Objective@#To evaluate clinical efficacy and safety of microneedle-mediated intradermal injection with hyaluronic acid for the treatment of sensitive skin.@*Methods@#A total of 53 female patients aged 21-54 years and diagnosed with sensitive skin were enrolled from Department of Cosmetic Dermatology, Dermatology Hospital of Southern Medical University from January to June in 2018, and were divided into 3 groups by using a random number generator and a residue-based method: high-pressure jet injection group (n = 23) receiving high-pressure jet injection with hyaluronic acid on the right side of the face (treatment side) and high-pressure jet injection with 0.9% sodium chloride solution on the left side of the face (control side) once every 2 weeks, microneedle injection group (n = 15) receiving microneedle-mediated injection with hyaluronic acid on the right side of the face (treatment side) and microneedle-mediated injection with 0.9% sodium chloride solution on the left side of the face (control side) once every 4 weeks, combination group (n = 15) receiving microneedle-mediated injection with hyaluronic acid on the right side of the face (treatment side) and high-pressure jet injection with hyaluronic acid on the left side of the face (control side) once every 4 weeks. All the patients in the above 3 groups received 4 consecutive sessions of treatment. Before the initial treatment and 2 weeks after the final treatment, erythema and skin pore scores were determined on the right and left sides of the face by using VISIA facial imaging system, lactic acid stinging test was performed, and skin sensitivity including severity of itching, dryness, erythema and scaling was evaluated. Two weeks after the final treatment, the overall improvement was evaluated with the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) by clinicians and patients. Adverse reactions were recorded during and after treatment. Statistical analysis was carried out by using paired t test, Wilcoxon sign rank sum test and chi-square test.@*Results@#Two weeks after the final treatment, the improvement of skin pore score in the treatment side was superior to that in the control side in the high-pressure jet injection group (t = 2.19, P = 0.03) , while no significant difference in the improvement of erythema score was observed between the treatment side and control side (t = 1.10, P = 0.27) ; in the microneedle injection group, the improvement of erythema and skin pore scores was greater in the treatment side than in the control side (t = 2.47, 3.02, both P = 0.01) ; in the combination group, the VISIA erythema score in the treatment and control sides was 0.59 ± 0.25 and 0.85 ± 0.31 respectively, the improvement of erythema score in the treatment side was superior to that in the control side (t = 5.02, P < 0.01) , while there was no significant difference in the improvement of skin pore score between the treatment side and control side (P > 0.05) . Two weeks after the final treatment, the severity of itching, dryness and scaling was significantly improved in both the treatment and control sides in the 3 groups compared with those before the initial treatment (P < 0.05) , while the severity of erythema was significantly improved only in the treatment side in the microneedle injection group and combination group when compared with that before the initial treatment (Z = -2.236, -2.887, respectively, both P < 0.05) . Moreover, both the microneedle injection group and combination group showed significantly decreased severity of erythema in the treatment side compared with that in the control side two weeks after the final treatment (Z = -2.646, -2.887, respectively, both P < 0.05) . Two weeks after the final treatment, the positive rate of the lactic acid stinging test significantly decreased in the treatment side compared with that before the initial treatment in the microneedle injection group (χ2 = 4.821, P = 0.028) , but showed no significant changes in the other groups (all P > 0.05) . No severe adverse reactions were observed during or after the treatment.@*Conclusion@#Microneedle intradermal injection with hyaluronic acid can effectively and safely improve erythema, skin pore and sensitive symptoms in patients with sensitive skin.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Acne is a common inflammatory skin disease that involves the seborrheic area, developing not only in adolescence but also in adulthood. Abnormal epidermal barrier function in acne is reported and suspected as a risk factor that leads to sensitive skin through a few experimental studies. Impaired skin barrier function against environmental factors and irritants may play a role in increasing sensitivity of the skin in patients with acne. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics of patients with acne and analyze the association between acne and sensitive skin. METHODS: Acne severity and history of treatments were recorded and subjective symptoms of sensitive skin with aggravating factors were analyzed through a questionnaire. Acne severity was determined using the Investigator's Global Assessment scale of acne severity and Global Acne Grading System. The score and severity of sensitive skin were determined using the Baumann skin-type test. RESULTS: Of 100 patients with acne, 76% were actually confirmed to have sensitive skin. However, there was no significant association between acne severity and severity of sensitive skin (p=0.805). The most common aggravating factor of sensitive skin was washing the face (60%), followed by cosmetics use (56%) and hot weather (55%). The most common symptom of sensitive skin was itching (55%), which was proven as the only factor associated with severity of sensitive skin (p=0.016). CONCLUSION: Cosmetics use on the face is a noticeable important aggravating factor of sensitive skin, which can provoke itching, which is proven as the only symptom significantly related with severity of sensitive skin. Therefore, in the treatment of acne with sensitive skin, proper use of moisturizers and careful washing are required, and it is important to avoid hot weather and excessive sun exposure and carefully choose cosmetics.
Subject(s)
Adolescent , Humans , Acne Vulgaris , Clinical Study , Irritants , Pruritus , Risk Factors , Skin Diseases , Skin , Solar System , WeatherABSTRACT
Sensitive skin is less tolerant to frequent and prolonged use of cosmetics and toiletries. It is self-diagnosed and typically unaccompanied by any obvious physical signs of irritation. With the change in lifestyle and also with increased opportunity to use many new brands of cosmetics and toiletries, there has been an increase in females complaining of unique sensation in their facial skin. Sensitive skin presents as smarting, burning, stinging, itching, and/or tight sensation in their facial skin. The condition is found in more than 50% of women and 40% of men, creating a sizable demand for products designed to minimize skin sensitivity. Good numbers of invasive and non-invasive tests are designed to evaluate and predict the sensitive skin. Management includes guidelines for selecting suitable cosmetics and toiletries in sensitive skin individuals.
ABSTRACT
Pele sensível (PS) é definida como uma condição de tolerância reduzida ao uso freqüente ou prolongado de cosméticos e produtos de higiene pessoal, que apresenta desde sinais clínicos visíveis, como eritema, edema e descamação, até sinais neurossensoriais subjetivos de desconforto, como pinicamento, queimação, prurido, ressecamento e dor. A fisiopatologia da PS consiste em reação inflamatória decorrente de uma disfunção da barreira cutânea associada ao desequilíbrio da resposta neuroimunoendocrinológica da pele. Neste trabalho demonstramos os efeitos do produto Relievene® SK sobre a proteção do metabolismo celular, considerando as atividades adaptógena e neuroendócrina deste composto, bem como a melhora da função da barreira cutânea e da hiper-reatividade da pele em indivíduos com PS.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Sensitive skin is largely agreed to be a lay term used by individuals who have reduced tolerance to frequent or prolonged use of cosmetics and toiletries, with symptoms ranging from subjective neurosensory forms of discomfort such as stinging, burning, itching, tightness and smarting sensations to visible signs of irritation such as erythema and scaling. Although the concept of sensitive skin is intriguing to many dermatologists, the diagnosis is dependant on self-perceived symptoms. Models to define sensitive skin are not standardized, and the term sensitive skin can be misleading. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate difference of influence to skin barrier function between corrosive and non-corrosive agents in sensitive skin. METHODS: 0.1%, 0.25%, 0.5%, 2% solution of sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) and 1%, 2.5%, 5%, 20% solution of nonanoic acid (NAA) were applied on volar forearm skin for 24 hours in healthy controls and self-perceived sensitive skin subjects without underlying problems. Clinical score, transepidermal water loss (TEWL), and erythema-index (E-index) were compared between healthy controls and the sensitive skin group. RESULTS: Clinical scores, TEWL values and E-indices showed a rising curve concentration for each irritant in a similar pattern. There were no significant differences in clinical score and TEWL value between non-sensitive and sensitive skin. In contrast, E-indices evaluated from sensitive skin subjects were much higher than those in a healthy controls. CONCLUSION: An elevated TEWL value indicates barrier impairment. An increase in the erythema parameter shows that cutaneous vascular reactions have an unspecifically exaggerated reaction to various irritants and this induces multifarious inflammatory reactions and vasodilation. Therefore, the results of this study suggest that sensitive skin without underlying disease is derived from cutaneous vascular hyperreactivity and various inflammatory reactions, rather than barrier impairment.
Subject(s)
Humans , Bites and Stings , Burns , Diagnosis , Erythema , Forearm , Irritants , Pruritus , Sensation , Skin , Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate , VasodilationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with sensitive skin are those individuals who state that their skin is more sensitive than the average person. But there is no clear-cut dermatological definition to describe, or standard method to evaluate sensitive skin. OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the biophysical differences between sensitive and non-sensitive skins, we measured baseline transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and performed the lactic acid sting test. METHODS: A total of 503 people responded to self-assessment questionnaires, composed of questions about self-perception, related factors, and symptoms and signs of sensitive skin. In 55 of these, we measured baseline TEWL and performed a 10% lactic acid sting test on the malar eminence of the face using a Hilltop chamber. In the lactic acid sting test, the stinging sensation was rated by patients every 1 minute, on a 4-point scale, with cumulative stinging scores. RESULTS: The incidence of self-reported sensitive skin was 43.3% for women and 23.9% for men. The cumulative scores of the lactic acid sting test were not higher in the sensitive skin group (p>0.05). However, the onset time of the stinging sensation was faster in the sensitive skin group (p0.05) between the sensitive skin and non-sensitive skin groups. Furthermore there was no correlation between baseline TEWL and 10% lactic acid sting test in the sensitive skin group compared to the non-sensitive skin group (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Our experiment showed that the 10% lactic acid sting test is still not an adequate or ideal method to assess sensitive skin, and another new reproducible and objective method is necessary to assess sensitive skin.
Subject(s)
Female , Humans , Male , Bites and Stings , Incidence , Lactic Acid , Self Concept , Self-Assessment , Sensation , SkinABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Sensitive skin has been described as a skin type showing higher reactivity than normal skin and developing exaggerated reactions when exposed to internal stimulants and external irritants. The Lactic acid sting test is a widely accepted method for evaluating sensitive skin and is employed for the selection of subjects experiencing invisible sensory irritation. Tape stripping of skin is a useful method for removing stratum corneum which plays a most important part in the barrier function of the skin. Measurement of the transepidermal water loss (TEWL) is the standard method to determine stratum corneum barrier status. A disturbed skin barrier is characterized by high TEWL. OBJECTIVE: The author performed this study to compare lactic acid sting test between sensitive skin and nonsensitive skin after tape stripping, not on the face but on the forearm. METHODS: A total of 40 individuals (20 individuals of the sensitive skin group and 20 individuals of the nonsensitive skin group) were selected by the method of self-assessment questionnaires related to sensitive skin. The individuals were tested a total of 6times, at internals of 2weeks, on the volar aspects of both forearms with 10% lactic acid after tape stripping, with or without a Hilltop chamber. The frequency of tape stripping was divided according to the TEWL into 3 groups as follows: mild(increase of TEWL> or = 5g/m2h compared to baseline TEWL), moderate (> or = 10g/m2h), and severe (> or = 20g/m2h). RESULTS: When 10% lactic acid sting tests were performed after mild and moderate tape stripping of skin, irrespective of the Hilltop chamber, there were more positive responders in the sensitive skin group (p<0.05). Also statistically, there was a significant difference between the sensitive skin group and the nonsensitive skin group in the comparison of the mean values of lactic acid sting scores (p<0.05). However, when 10% lactic acid sting tests were conducted after severe tape stripping of skin, irrespective of the Hilltop chamber, there were no statistically significant difference between two groups when comparison of the positive rates and the mean values were made. CONCLUSION: The Lactic acid sting test with the Hilltop chamber, after mild and moderate tape stripping is a useful method to discover sensitive skin.
Subject(s)
Bites and Stings , Forearm , Irritants , Lactic Acid , Patient Selection , Self-Assessment , Skin , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Users of cosmetics and skin care products often report adverse reactions ranging from itching, stinging and dryness to intense inflammatory responses such as erythema, wheals and rashes. Sensitive skin has been described as a skin type showing higher reactivity than normal skin, and it develops exaggerated reactions when exposed to internal stimulants and external irritants. The alpha hydroxy acids (AHAs), naturally occurring organic acids which include lactic acid, glycolic acid, citric acid, malic acid and tartaric acid are all kinds of noncorrosive irritants. The lactic acid sting test is widely accepted as a marker of sensitive skin and is employed for the selection of subjects experiencing invisible sensory irritation. OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to compare the results of sting tests conducted on the sensitive and nonsensitive skin group which had been exposed to various kinds of AHAs. METHOD: A total of 50 individuals (25 individuals with a sensitive skin group and 25 individuals with a nonsensitive skin group) were selected by the method of self-assessment questionnaires relating to sensitive skin. The subjects were tested on the face with 2 variables of 5 AHA types ( with or without Hilltop chamber occlusion), at 2 weeks intervals, for a total of 10 times. RESULTS: The positive response rate of stinging in the sensitive skin group was higher than that in the nonsensitive skin group for all tests except the glycolic acid sting test using Hilltop chamber (p<0.05). The mean value of sting scores in the sensitive skin group was higher than that in the nonsensitive skin group for all tests (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Sting tests using various kinds of AHAs are a useful method in determining sensitive skin.
Subject(s)
Bites and Stings , Citric Acid , Dental Calculus , Erythema , Exanthema , Hydroxy Acids , Irritants , Lactic Acid , Patient Selection , Pruritus , Self-Assessment , Skin Care , Skin , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is no clear dermatologic definition to describe sensitive skin which usually includes subjective and psychological meanings. Some individuals exhibit exaggerated response, especially on the face, ranging from itching to intense adverse reaction like erythema, wheal, and eczema in comparison to normal ones when exposed to external irritants, allergens, environmental changes or internal stimulants. OBJECTIVE: To diagnose sensitive skin, lactic acid sting test is well known to represent a person who has subjective symptoms like itching, burning, prickling and stinging. We tried to compare several lactic acid sting tests to search for sensitive skin conveniently and rationally. METHODS: A total of 50 panelists (25 people of sensitive group and 25 people of control group, respectively) were selected by the method of self-assessment questionnaires related to sensitive skin. The panelists were tested on face, by conditioning 3 variances (5% or 10% Lactic acid, Hydration, Hilltop chamber), in 2 week intervals, 8 times totally. RESULTS: When lactic acid sting tests were performed using Hilltop chamber, there were more positive responders in sensitive group(p<0.05). There was statistically a significant difference between the 2 groups in the comparison of mean values of lactic acid sting scores (p<0.05). Sensitive group showed higher sting scores and exhibited much more difference with time (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Our experiment showed that occlusive technique using Hilltop chamber was an inspiring and useful method of several lactic acid sting tests to find out sensitive skin.
Subject(s)
Humans , Allergens , Bites and Stings , Burns , Eczema , Erythema , Irritants , Lactic Acid , Pruritus , Self-Assessment , Skin , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Sensitive skin has been described as a skin type showing higher reactivity than normal skin and developing exaggerated reactions when exposed to internal stimulants and external irritants. The lactic acid sting test is widely accepted as a marker of skin sensitivity and employed for the selection of subjects experiencing invisible sensory irritation. OBJECTIVE: To carry out an epidemiological study to assess the prevalence and possible related factors of sensitive skin in a regional population, and to examine the relationship between sensitive skin and subjective irritation using the lactic acid sting test. METHODS: A total of 514 people responded to self-assessment questionnaires composed of questions about the self-perception, related factors, symptoms and signs of sensitive skin. We assessed subjective irritation using the lactic acid sting test in 54 volunteers. RESULTS: The results are summarized as follows: 1. The incidences of self-reported sensitive skin were 55.7% for women, 38.9% for men and 51.0% for all responders. 2. The family history and seasonal variation of sensitive skin were significantly more common in sensitive skin group. 3. The face especially the cheek area was the most sensitive portion of body, cosmetics were common irritants. 4. The lactic acid stinging scores were significantly higher in the sensitive skin group. CONCLUSION: Our survey indicated that sensitive skin is a common problem for people and a complex problem with genetic, individual, environmental implications and the lactic acid sting test is a valuable method to define skin sensitivity.