Aging Clinical and Experimental Research

, Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 195–200 | Cite as

Functional and physiological characteristics of the aging skin

  • Miranda A. Farage
  • Kenneth W. Miller
  • Peter Elsner
  • Howard I. Maibach
Mini Review

Abstract

As life expectancy in the U.S. increases — and with it the proportion of the aged in the population — appropriate care of elderly skin becomes a medical concern of increasing importance. As skin ages, the intrinsic structural changes that are a natural consequence of passing time are inevitably followed by subsequent physiological changes that affect the skin’s ability to function as the interface between internal and external environments. The pH of the skin surface increases with age, increasing its susceptibility to infection. Neurosensory perception of superficial pain is diminished both in intensity and speed of perception (increasing the risk of thermal injury); deep tissue pain, however, may be enhanced. A decline in lipid content as the skin ages inhibits the permeability of nonlipophilic compounds, reducing the efficacy of some topical medications. Allergic and irritant reactions are blunted, as is the inflammatory response, compromising the ability of the aged skin to affect wound repair. These functional impairments (although a predictable consequence of intrinsic structural changes) have the potential to cause significant morbidity in the elderly patient and may, as well, be greatly exacerbated by extrinsic factors like photodamage. As numbers of the elderly increase, medical as well as cosmetic dermatological interventions will be necessary to optimize the quality of life for this segment of the population.

Keywords

Aging skin biochemical neurosensory perception permeability skin pH skin repair vascularization vitamin D wound healing 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Arias E. United States life tables, 2002. National vital statistics reports; Vol. 53. No. 6. Hyattsville. Maryland: National Center for Health Statistics 2004.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kligman AM, Koblenzer C. Demographics and psychological implications for the aging population. Dermatol Clin 1997; 15: 549–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Life expectancy will be 100. [document on the Internet]. 2006 Feb 22. [cited 2006 Feb 24]. Available from: http//www.news24.com/ News24/Technology/News/0,9294,2-13-1443_1885709,00.html.
  4. 4.
    Brincat MP, Baron YM, Galea R. Estrogens and the skin. Climacteric 2005; 8: 110–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Guinot C, Malvy DJ, Ambroisine L, et al. Relative contribution of intrinsic vs extrinsic factors to skin aging as determined by a validated skin age score. Arch Dermatol 2002; 138: 1454–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fenske NA, Lober CW. Structural and functional changes of normal aging skin. J Am Acad Dermatol 1986; 15: 571–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Klaassen CD. Casarett and Doull’s toxicology: the basic science of poisons, 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996: 529–46.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Monteiro-Riviere NA. Introduction to histological aspects of dermatotoxicology. Microsc Res Tech 1997; 37: 171.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Menon G, Ghadially R. Morphology of lipid alterations in the epidermis: a review. Microsc Res Tech 1997; 37: 180–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grove GL. Physiologic changes in older skin. Clin Geriatr Med 1989; 5: 115–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    McCallion R, Li Wan Po A. Dry and photo-aged skin: manifestations and management. J Clin Pharm Ther 1993; 18: 15–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jackson SM, Williams ML, Feingold KR, Elias PM. Pathobiology of the stratum corneum. West J Med 1993; 158: 279–85.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fiers SA. Breaking the cycle: the etiology of incontinence dermatitis and evaluating and using skin care products. Ostomy Wound Manage 1996: 42: 32–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Waller JM, Maibach HI. Age and skin structure and function, a quantitative approach (I): blood flow, pH, thickness, and ultrasound echogenicity. Skin Res Technol 2005; 11: 221–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lautenbacher S, Lunz M, Strate P, Nielsen E, Arendt-Nielsen L. Age effects on pain thresholds, temporal summation and spatial summation of heat and pressure pain. Pain 2005; 115: 410–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Harvell JD, Maibach HI. Percutaneous absorption and inflammation in aged skin: a review. J Am Acad Dermatol 1994; 194: 1015–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Martini F. Fundamentals of Anatomy and Physiology. San Francisco: Benjamin-Cummings, 2004.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Roskos KV, Guy RH, Maibach HI. Percutaneous absorption in the aged. Dermatol Clin 1986; 4: 455–65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ghadially R. Aging and the epidermal permeability barrier: implications for contact dermatitis. Am J Contact Dermat 1998; 9: 162–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Martini FH, Bartholomew EF. Essentials of Anatomy and Physiology, 3rd edition. San Francisco: Pearson Benjamin Cummings, 2002.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Eisner P, Wilhelm D, Maibach HI. Sodium lauryl sulfate-induced irritant contact dermatitis in vulvar and forearm skin of premenopausal and postmenopausal women. J Am Acad Dermatol 1990; 23: 648–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Suter-Widmer J, Eisner P. Age and irritation. In: Agner T, Maibach H, eds. The irritant contact dermatitis syndrome. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, 1996: 257–65.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Changes in Allergic Reactivity. Aging and the Immune System. Merck Manual of Geriatrics. [Online] [cited 2006 August 23] http://www.merck.com/mrkshared/mmg/sec16/ch131/ch131e.jsp.
  24. 24.
    Robinson MK. Population differences in skin structure and physiology and the susceptibility to irritant and allergic contact dermatitis: implications for skin safety testing and risk assessment. Contact Dermatitis 1999; 41: 65–79.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Montagna W. Advances in biology of the skin. In: Aging, Vol. VI. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1965: 1–16.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Muggleton-Harris AL, Reisert PS, Burghoff RL. In vitro characterization of response to stimulus (wounding) with regard to ageing in human skin fibroblasts. Mech Ageing Dev 1982; 19: 37–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Grove GL, Kligman AM. Age-associated changes in human epidermal cell renewal. J Gerontol 1983; 38: 137–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Barland CO, Zettersten E, Brown BS, Ye J, Elias PM, Ghadially R. Imiquimod-induced interleukin-1 alpha stimulation improves barrier homeostatis in aged murin epidermis. J Invest Dermatol 2004; 122: 330–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hall GK, Phillips TJ. Skin and hormone therapy. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2004; 47: 437–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Farage MA, Miller KW, Eisner P, Maibach I. Structural characteristics of the aging skin: a review. Cutan Ocul Toxicol 2007; 26: 343–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wolff EF, Narayan D, Taylor HS. Long-term effects of hormone therapy on skin rigidity and wrinkles. Fertil Steril 2005; 84: 285–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Draelos ZD, Ertel K, Berge C. Niacinamide-containing facial moisturizer improves skin barrier and benefits subjects with rosacea. Cutis 2005; 76: 135–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Schneider TE, Barland C, Alex AM, et al. Measuring stem cell frequency in epidermis: A quantitative in vivo functional assay for long-term repopulating cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003; 100: 11412–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ghadially R, Brown BE, Sequeira-Martin SM, Feingold KR, Elias PM. The aged epidermal permeability barrier. Structural, functional, and lipid biochemical abnormalities in humans and a senescent murine model. J Clin Invest 1995; 95: 2281–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wilhelm KP, Maibach H. Influence of aging on the barrier function of human skin evaluated by in vivo transepidermal water loss measurements. In Leveque JL, Agache PG, eds. Aging Skin: Properties and Functional Changes. New York: Marcel Dekker. Inc, 1993: 239–49.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Buckley C. Rustin MH. Management of irritable skin disorders in the elderly. Br J Hosp Med 1990: 44: 24–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Phillips T, Kanj L. Clinical manifestations of skin aging. In: Squier C, Hill MW, eds. The effect of aging in oral mucosa and skin. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, 1994: 25–40.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Saint-Leger D, Agache PG. Variations in skin surface lipids during life. In Leveque JL, Agache PG, eds. Aging Skin: Properties and Functional Changes. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc, 1993: 251–62.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ryan J. Direct observation of capillary modifications in the aged. In Leveque JL. Agache PG, eds. Aging Skin: Properties and Functional Changes. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc, 1993: 87–104.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Farage M, Maibach H. Lifetime changes in the vulva and vagina. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2006; 273: 195–202.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Internal Publishing Switzerland 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miranda A. Farage
    • 1
  • Kenneth W. Miller
    • 1
  • Peter Elsner
    • 2
  • Howard I. Maibach
    • 3
  1. 1.The Procter & Gamble CompanyWinton Hill Business CenterCincinnatiUSA
  2. 2.Klinik Fur DermatologicJenaGermany
  3. 3.Department of DermatologyUniversity of CaliforniaSan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations