Acute skin barrier disruption with repeated tape stripping: An in vivo model for damage skin barrier

Skin Research and Technology

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 162-168

  Gao, Yanrui ^a,b   Wang, Xuemin ^b   Chen, Shuangyu ^c   Li, Shuyuan ^d   Liu, Xiaoping ^a  

^a ANHUI MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b Skin and Cosmetic Research Department   (China)

^c XUZHOU MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^d TONGJI HOSPITAL OF TONGJI UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Non invasive; Skin barrier; Squamometry; Tape stripping; Transepidermal water loss

Indexed keywords

CHANGE TRENDS; IN-VIVO; NON-INVASIVE; PHYSICAL STIMULATIONS; SKIN BARRIER FUNCTIONS; SQUAMOMETRY; TAPE STRIPPING; TRANSEPIDERMAL WATER LOSS;

DERMATOLOGY; ENGINEERING RESEARCH;

ADHESION;

ACUTE BARRIER DISRUPTION; ADHESIVE TAPE STRIPPING; ADULT; ARTICLE; EPIDERMIS; FOREARM; HUMAN; IN VIVO STUDY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NON INVASIVE PROCEDURE; NORMAL HUMAN; SKIN CARE; SKIN DEFECT; SKIN EXAMINATION; SKIN FUNCTION; SKIN TEST; SQUAMOMETRY;

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SKIN; SKIN ABSORPTION; SURGICAL TAPE; WATER LOSS, INSENSIBLE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84876305075     PISSN: 0909752X     EISSN: 16000846     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/srt.12028     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Elias PM. Stratum corneum defensive functions: an integrated view. J Invest Dermatol 2005; 125: 183-200.
2. Elias PM, Feingold KR. Stratum corneum barrier function: definitions and broad concepts. In: Elias PM, Feingold KR, eds. Skin Barrier. New York: Taylor and Francis Group; 2006: 1-4.
3. Landmann L. The epidermal permeability barrier. Anat Embryol 1988; 178: 1-13.
4. Chilcott RP, Dalton CH, Emmanuel AJ, Allen CE, Bradley ST. Transepidermal water loss does not correlate with skin barrier function in vitro. J Invest Dermatol 2002; 118: 871-875.
5. Bashir SJ, Chew AL, Anigbogu A, Dreher F, Maibach HI. Physical and physiological effects of stratum corneum tape stripping. Skin Res Technol 2001; 7: 40-48.
6. Wolf J. Die innere Struktur der Zellen des Stratum desquamans der menschlichen Epidermis. Z mikr-anat Forsch 1939; 46: 170-202.
7. Gerritsen MJ, van Erp PE, van Vlijmen-Willems IM, Lenders LT, van de Kerkhof PC. Repeated tape stripping of normal skin: a histological assessment and comparison with events seen in psoriasis. Arch Dermatol Res 1994; 286: 455-461.
8. Pena Ferreira MR, Costa PC, Bahia FM. Efficacy of anti-wrinkle products in skin surface appearance: a comparative study using non-invasive methods. Skin Res Technol 2010; 16: 444-449.
9. Goffin V, Piérard GE. Corneosurfametry and the compromised atopic stratum corneum. Arch Dermatol Res 1996; 288: 489-491.
10. Paye M, Dalimier CH, Cartiaux Y, Chabassol C. Consumer perception of sensitive hands: what is behind it? Skin Res Technol 1999; 5: 28-32.
11. Tan YM, Wang XM, Fan GB, Ruan J, Zhang YH, Cao YN. Comparison of physiological lipid creams with different ratios effect on the skin barrier function. Chin J Aesth Med 2011; 20: 1726-1729.
12. Graves CJ, Edwards C, Marks RA. Model of measured percussive mechanical trauma and its effects on skin. Br J Dermatol 1993; 129: 558-562.
13. Marks R, Black D. Methodologies produce and assess standardized trauma to the skin. Am J Ind Med 1985; 8: 491-498.
14. Fernandes JD, Machado MC, Oliveira ZN. Children and newborn skin care and prevention. An Bras Dermatol 2011; 86: 102-110.
15. Yosipovitch G, Maayan-Metzger A, Merlob P, Sirota L. Skin barrier properties in different body areas in neonates. Pediatrics 2000; 106: 105-108.
16. Barker N, Hadgraft J, Rutter N. Skin permeability in the newborn. J Invest Dermatol 1987; 88: 409-411.
17. Sekkat N, Kalia YN, Guy RH. Development of an in vitro model for premature neonatal skin: biophysical characterization using transepidermal water loss. J Pharm Sci 2004; 93: 2936-2940.