D. Black1, A. Del Pozo, J. M. Lagarde, Y. Gall. 1. Pierre Fabre Research Institute, Cosmetics Research and Evaluation Department, Toulouse, France and; Pharmaceutical Technology Unit, Department of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Technology, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: A 10-month-long study on a panel of 24 young female subjects was carried out to determine whether various biophysical aspects of the stratum corneum (SC) varied with season. METHODS: Three different anatomical sites (calf, inner forearm and crow's foot wrinkle area of the face) were assessed in February, April, July and December of the same year. The assessments made were skin surface hydration using an electrical capacitance technique, transepidermal water loss by evaporimetry, number of corneocytes released using a turbine stimulation method, and skin surface topography using optical profilometry. RESULTS: The results showed significant anatomical differences: with the crow's foot site > forearm > calf, for skin surface hydration and corneocyte numbers; and the crow's foot site > forearm and calf, with no difference between the latter two sites, for TEWL measurements. With these techniques, seasonal differences were observed mainly in the calf, to a lesser extent in the forearm, but not in the crow's foot area. These mainly involved increases in these three parameters in July, as opposed to the other time-points. Parameters of skin surface topography however, showed no consistent seasonal pattern, but markedly higher values were observed for the forearm in comparison to the calf and crow's foot sites, which were similar. From meteorological data obtained, the average daily maximum temperature and hours of sunshine increased to peak values in July, as did the absolute humidity derived from relative humidity data. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the results are most likely to represent changes in the SC due to climatic factors, with the calf and forearm sites being most affected in comparison to the face (crow's foot wrinkle area), which seems unaffected. The reasons for this latter site remaining unchanged may be due to its greater UV exposure, sebum content, and that the use of facial cosmetics was allowed.
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: A 10-month-long study on a panel of 24 young female subjects was carried out to determine whether various biophysical aspects of the stratum corneum (SC) varied with season. METHODS: Three different anatomical sites (calf, inner forearm and crow's foot wrinkle area of the face) were assessed in February, April, July and December of the same year. The assessments made were skin surface hydration using an electrical capacitance technique, transepidermal water loss by evaporimetry, number of corneocytes released using a turbine stimulation method, and skin surface topography using optical profilometry. RESULTS: The results showed significant anatomical differences: with the crow's foot site > forearm > calf, for skin surface hydration and corneocyte numbers; and the crow's foot site > forearm and calf, with no difference between the latter two sites, for TEWL measurements. With these techniques, seasonal differences were observed mainly in the calf, to a lesser extent in the forearm, but not in the crow's foot area. These mainly involved increases in these three parameters in July, as opposed to the other time-points. Parameters of skin surface topography however, showed no consistent seasonal pattern, but markedly higher values were observed for the forearm in comparison to the calf and crow's foot sites, which were similar. From meteorological data obtained, the average daily maximum temperature and hours of sunshine increased to peak values in July, as did the absolute humidity derived from relative humidity data. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the results are most likely to represent changes in the SC due to climatic factors, with the calf and forearm sites being most affected in comparison to the face (crow's foot wrinkle area), which seems unaffected. The reasons for this latter site remaining unchanged may be due to its greater UV exposure, sebum content, and that the use of facial cosmetics was allowed.
Authors: S Iizaka; L Jiao; J Sugama; T Minematsu; M Oba; J Matsuo; K Tabata; T Sugiyama; H Sanada Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Johan du Plessis; Aleksandr Stefaniak; Fritz Eloff; Swen John; Tove Agner; Tzu-Chieh Chou; Rosemary Nixon; Markus Steiner; Anja Franken; Irena Kudla; Linn Holness Journal: Skin Res Technol Date: 2013-01-19 Impact factor: 2.365
Authors: Megan N Kelchen; Gopi Menon; Patrick Ten Eyck; Donald Prettypaul; Nicole K Brogden Journal: Skin Pharmacol Physiol Date: 2018-08-15 Impact factor: 3.479
Authors: Anna Berekméri; Ana Tiganescu; Adewonuola A Alase; Edward Vital; Martin Stacey; Miriam Wittmann Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2019-08-21 Impact factor: 8.786