Microtopography and Barrier Function in Healthy Skin: Differences between Forearm, Cheek and Palm
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítemAutor
Sanabria de la Torre, Raquel; Ceres Muñoz, María; Pretel Lara, Carlota; Montero Vílchez, Trinidad; Arias Santiago, Salvador AntonioEditorial
MDPI
Materia
Skin health Homeostasis
Fecha
2023-12-29Referencia bibliográfica
Sanabria-de la Torre, R.; Ceres-Muñoz, M.; Pretel-Lara, C.; Montero-Vílchez, T.; Arias-Santiago, S. Microtopography and Barrier Function in Healthy Skin: Differences between Forearm, Cheek and Palm. Cosmetics 2024, 11, 5. https:// doi.org/10.3390/cosmetics11010005
Patrocinador
Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII) . Project PI23/01875Resumen
(1) Background: Skin barrier function resides mostly in the stratum corneum, which consists
of a protein component, the corneocyte (bricks), which provides a scaffold for the second component,
the extracellular matrix, consisting of multilayers of lipids (mortar). These two components closely
interact and this could be the basis for the differences in the biophysical properties of the skin between
anatomical regions. So, the aim of this study was to compare skin microstructural properties between
body sites. (2) Methods: A comparative study was conducted that included healthy individuals
without previous skin diseases. Skin barrier function parameters and microtopography parameters
(smoothness, roughness, desquamation, wrinkles, surface, volume, contrast, variance, homogeneity,
anisotropy, total cell count, flaking index, skin surface hardness, brightness, deformability and
friction) were measured on the forearm, cheek and palm. (3) Results: 44 participants were included
in this study, with a mean age of 38.8 ± 15.0 years. Significant differences were found between
body sites for 14 of the 15 parameters evaluated. Smoothness was higher on the forearm than on
the cheek and palm (240.02 Sems vs. 348.16 vs. 408.19 Sems, p < 0.05). Hardness was higher on
the palm than on the forearm and cheek (13.22 AU vs. 9.44 AU vs. 7.94 AU, p < 0.05). Moreover,
we observed that sociodemographic characteristics such as age, sex, tobacco and/or alcohol use,
influenced the parameters evaluated. (4) Conclusions: The differences in skin barrier function and
microtopography between anatomical regions reflects the different structure of skin in each body
part and could help to understand the influence of the sociodemographic characteristics on theses
parameters. This information could be useful for comparison with pathological skin characteristics
and for targeting new treatments.