BACKGROUND/AIM: Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) is one of the most important biophysical parameters for evaluating the efficiency of the human skin water barrier. Different approaches exist to measure TEWL. The most commonly used methodology consists of the open chamber diffusion technique in which the water vapor pressure gradient is measured in g/h m2 according to Fick's law. A typical apparatus is the Tewameter. Recently, a portable device--the VapoMeter--became available with a humidity sensor in a closed chamber. METHODS: In the present work, the closed chamber VapoMeter is compared with the open chamber Tewameter for its applicability to assess TEWL. A comparative study--including parallel in vivo measurements with both devices--was carried out on human forearm skin. RESULTS: It could be concluded that both instruments are reliable tools. A good correlation between recordings (r=0.503-0.966) was found with a consistent feature of measuring higher TEWL values for the Tewameter than for the VapoMeter. Probe pressure, probe temperature and relative humidity were revealed to be important parameters inducing significant differences in data outcome. CONCLUSIONS: From skin barrier damage experiments it became clear that the Tewameter is able to detect significantly smaller differences than the VapoMeter. In addition, the closed chamber device is currently not sensitive enough to discriminate for the effects induced by diurnal rhythm and fluctuations as a function of time. On the other hand, the small and handy VapoMeter allows more flexibility in measuring protocols and in in-use performance.
BACKGROUND/AIM: Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) is one of the most important biophysical parameters for evaluating the efficiency of the human skin water barrier. Different approaches exist to measure TEWL. The most commonly used methodology consists of the open chamber diffusion technique in which the water vapor pressure gradient is measured in g/h m2 according to Fick's law. A typical apparatus is the Tewameter. Recently, a portable device--the VapoMeter--became available with a humidity sensor in a closed chamber. METHODS: In the present work, the closed chamber VapoMeter is compared with the open chamber Tewameter for its applicability to assess TEWL. A comparative study--including parallel in vivo measurements with both devices--was carried out on human forearm skin. RESULTS: It could be concluded that both instruments are reliable tools. A good correlation between recordings (r=0.503-0.966) was found with a consistent feature of measuring higher TEWL values for the Tewameter than for the VapoMeter. Probe pressure, probe temperature and relative humidity were revealed to be important parameters inducing significant differences in data outcome. CONCLUSIONS: From skin barrier damage experiments it became clear that the Tewameter is able to detect significantly smaller differences than the VapoMeter. In addition, the closed chamber device is currently not sensitive enough to discriminate for the effects induced by diurnal rhythm and fluctuations as a function of time. On the other hand, the small and handy VapoMeter allows more flexibility in measuring protocols and in in-use performance.
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: Randi Lundberg; Susanne K Clausen; Wanyong Pang; Dennis S Nielsen; Kristian Möller; Knud E Josefsen; Axel K Hansen Journal: Comp Med Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 0.982
Authors: A Summers; M O Visscher; S K Khatry; J B Sherchand; S C LeClerq; J Katz; J M Tielsch; L C Mullany Journal: J Perinatol Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 2.521
Authors: Andre Miotto; Pedro Augusto Antunes Honda; Thiago Gangi Bachichi; Caio Santos Holanda; Ernesto Evangelista Neto; João Alessio Juliano Perfeito; Luiz Eduardo Villaça Leão; Altair da Silva Costa Journal: Einstein (Sao Paulo) Date: 2018-11-08
Authors: Nelson Wolosker; Augusto Ishy; Guilherme Yazbek; Jose Ribas Milanez de Campos; Paulo Kauffman; Pedro Puech-Leão; Fabio Biscegli Jatene Journal: Clinics (Sao Paulo) Date: 2013 Impact factor: 2.365