Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Measuring transepidermal water loss: a comparative in vivo study of condenser-chamber, unventilated-chamber and open-chamber systems.
Skin Res Technol. 2009 Nov; 15(4):392-8.SR

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Two main systems have been utilized for measuring transepidermal water loss (TEWL): open chamber and closed chamber. Yet, further validation and standardization studies may be necessary to reveal the sensitivity, precision, and robustness of these instruments.

METHODS

Three instruments are compared for their applicability to assess TEWL: unventilated chamber, open chamber and condenser chamber. The comparative study was performed on human forearm skin (n=6), in the normal condition (baseline), and after (1) 10 tape strippings on both arms, (2) moisturizer cream (Eucerin) and petrolatum application for 1 h, and (3) 1% sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) aqueous solution and distilled water (as control) application for 20 min.

RESULTS

The condenser-chamber system, was the only device among these three that could show the effect of tape stripping on TEWL values as compared with baseline (P<0.001). The effect of moisturization, in terms of % change of TEWL values after application of cream and petrolatum, did not show significant difference between devices (P>0.05). However, only the values obtained from condenser-chamber device revealed a highly significant change as compared with baseline (P<0.001). Condenser-chamber system could also discriminate between the effect of moisturizer and petrolatum on TEWL values (P<0.05). The change of TEWL values after SLS application was shown to be significant by unventilated and condenser-chamber systems (P<0.05). However, none of the devices differentiated between the effect of water and 1% SLS solution applied for 20 min. The values obtained from all three instruments correlate well with each other (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our results highlight the differences between two closed-chamber TEWL measurement instruments, which are designed based on different measurement principles. This may provide insights to find the best practice to improve the quality, precision and sensitivity of the measurements.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Dermatology, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA. farahmands@derm.ucsf.eduNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Validation Study

Language

eng

PubMed ID

19832948

Citation

Farahmand, Sara, et al. "Measuring Transepidermal Water Loss: a Comparative in Vivo Study of Condenser-chamber, Unventilated-chamber and Open-chamber Systems." Skin Research and Technology : Official Journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI), vol. 15, no. 4, 2009, pp. 392-8.
Farahmand S, Tien L, Hui X, et al. Measuring transepidermal water loss: a comparative in vivo study of condenser-chamber, unventilated-chamber and open-chamber systems. Skin Res Technol. 2009;15(4):392-8.
Farahmand, S., Tien, L., Hui, X., & Maibach, H. I. (2009). Measuring transepidermal water loss: a comparative in vivo study of condenser-chamber, unventilated-chamber and open-chamber systems. Skin Research and Technology : Official Journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI), 15(4), 392-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0846.2009.00376.x
Farahmand S, et al. Measuring Transepidermal Water Loss: a Comparative in Vivo Study of Condenser-chamber, Unventilated-chamber and Open-chamber Systems. Skin Res Technol. 2009;15(4):392-8. PubMed PMID: 19832948.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Measuring transepidermal water loss: a comparative in vivo study of condenser-chamber, unventilated-chamber and open-chamber systems. AU - Farahmand,Sara, AU - Tien,Lilian, AU - Hui,Xiaoying, AU - Maibach,Howard I, PY - 2009/10/17/entrez PY - 2009/10/17/pubmed PY - 2010/1/8/medline SP - 392 EP - 8 JF - Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI) JO - Skin Res Technol VL - 15 IS - 4 N2 - BACKGROUND/AIMS: Two main systems have been utilized for measuring transepidermal water loss (TEWL): open chamber and closed chamber. Yet, further validation and standardization studies may be necessary to reveal the sensitivity, precision, and robustness of these instruments. METHODS: Three instruments are compared for their applicability to assess TEWL: unventilated chamber, open chamber and condenser chamber. The comparative study was performed on human forearm skin (n=6), in the normal condition (baseline), and after (1) 10 tape strippings on both arms, (2) moisturizer cream (Eucerin) and petrolatum application for 1 h, and (3) 1% sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) aqueous solution and distilled water (as control) application for 20 min. RESULTS: The condenser-chamber system, was the only device among these three that could show the effect of tape stripping on TEWL values as compared with baseline (P<0.001). The effect of moisturization, in terms of % change of TEWL values after application of cream and petrolatum, did not show significant difference between devices (P>0.05). However, only the values obtained from condenser-chamber device revealed a highly significant change as compared with baseline (P<0.001). Condenser-chamber system could also discriminate between the effect of moisturizer and petrolatum on TEWL values (P<0.05). The change of TEWL values after SLS application was shown to be significant by unventilated and condenser-chamber systems (P<0.05). However, none of the devices differentiated between the effect of water and 1% SLS solution applied for 20 min. The values obtained from all three instruments correlate well with each other (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Our results highlight the differences between two closed-chamber TEWL measurement instruments, which are designed based on different measurement principles. This may provide insights to find the best practice to improve the quality, precision and sensitivity of the measurements. SN - 1600-0846 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/19832948/Measuring_transepidermal_water_loss:_a_comparative_in_vivo_study_of_condenser_chamber_unventilated_chamber_and_open_chamber_systems_ L2 - https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0846.2009.00376.x DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -