Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Chemical Peels in der ästhetischen Dermatologie

Chemical peels in aesthetic dermatology

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Hautarzt Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Chemische Peels werden in sehr oberflächliche, oberflächliche, mitteltiefe und tiefe Peels eingeteilt. Für ein optimales Ergebnis werden die Peels durch die Auswahl der entsprechenden Peelsubstanz, ihrer Konzentration und durch Druck und Frequenz der Applikationen dem zu behandelnden Hautbefund angepasst. Mit standardisierten Peellösungen können die Einwirktiefe präoperativ bestimmt und Nebenwirkungen dadurch minimiert werden. Trichloressigsäure (TCA) mit dem breitesten Indikationsspektrum ist die am häufigsten verwendete Peelsubstanz in verschiedenen Konzentrationen und in Kombination mit anderen Substanzen. Neben der Indikation zum Einsatz bei Skin Resurfacing, aktinisch geschädigter Haut, Präkanzerosen, Falten und Pigmentläsionen haben oberflächliche Chemical Peels den Vorteil, dass sie im Bereich des gesamten Integuments angewandt werden können. In dieser Übersicht werden die Anwendung von verschiedenen Peels und ihre möglichen Komplikationen dargestellt. Derzeit sind mehr als 45 Chemical Peels mit den verschiedensten Wirkstoffkombinationen auf dem europäischen Markt.

Abstract

Chemical peels are classified as very superficial (exfoliation), superficial (epidermal), medium (papillary dermal) and deep (reticular dermal). A successful peel depends upon a number of variables, such as choice of the peeling agent, its concentration, and the pressure and frequency of the applications; all must be adjusted to the patient’s skin condition. Through standardization of the peeling agents, the level of injury can be determined pre-operatively and complications minimized. Trichloroacetic acid (TCA) is the most popular peeling agent used in different concentrations. It has the broadest spectrum of indications due to its versatility in combination with other peeling agents. Indications for superficial peels include skin resurfacing, wrinkles, actinically damaged skin, actinic keratoses and benign pigmented lesions. Superficial peels have the advantage that they can be used on most regions of the body. The use of different chemical peels, their varying effects and their potential complications are reviewed. There are at present more than 45 chemical peels with different combinations of agents available on the European market.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5
Abb. 6
Abb. 7
Abb. 8
Abb. 9

Literatur

  1. Asken S (1989) Unoccluded phenol peels—reviews and update. J Dermatol Surg Oncol 15:998–1008

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Alt TH (1989) Occluded Baker-Gordon chemical peel: review and update. J Dermatol Surg Oncol 15:980–993

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ayres S (1962) Superficial chemosurgery in treating aging skin. Arch Dermatol 85:125–133

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baker TJ, Gordon HL (1961) The ablation of rhytides by chemical means; a preliminary report. J Fla Med Assoc 48:541

    Google Scholar 

  5. Baker TJ, Gordon HL, Mosienko P et al. (1974) Long-term histological study of skin after chemical face peeling. Plast Reconstr Surg 53:522–525

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bergfeld W, Tung R, Vidimos A et al. (1997) Improving the cosmetic appearance of photoaged skin with glycolic acid. J Am Acad Dermatol 36:1011–1013

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bernstein EF, Lee J, Brown D et al. (2001) Glycolic acid treatment increases type I Collagen mRNA and hyaluronic acid content of human skin. Dermatol Surg 27:429–433

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Botta SA, Straith RE, Goodwin HH (1988) Cardiac arrhythmias in phenol face peeling: a suggested protocol for prevention. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2:115–117

    Google Scholar 

  9. Brody HJ, Hailey CW (1986) Medium-depth chemical peeling of the skin: a variation of superficial chemosurgery. J Dermatol Surg Oncol 12:1268–1275

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Brody HJ (1997) Chemical peeling and resurfacing, 2nd edn. Mosby Year Book, St. Louis

  11. Brody HJ, Monheit GD, Resnik SS et al. (2000) A history of chemical peeling (editorial). Dermatol Surg 26:405–409

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Brown AM, Kaplan LM, Brown ME (1960) Phenol induced histological skin changes: hazards, technique, and uses. Br J Plast Surg 13:158–169

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bryan CP (1974) Ancient Egytian medicine: the papyrus Ebers (Übersetzung). Ares Publishers, Chicago, pp 158–161

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chew J et al. (1999) Treatment of upper lip wrinkles: a comparison of 950 µs dwell time carbon dioxide laser with unoccluded Baker’s phenol chemical peel. J Dermatol Surg 25:262–266

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Clark RA (1985) Cutaneous tissue repair basic biologic considerations. J Am Acad Dermatol 13:701–725

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Coleman WP, Glogau RG, Resnik SS (1994) Guidelines of care for chemical peeling. J Am Acad Dermatol Suppl:3–10

    Google Scholar 

  17. Coleman WP, Lawrence N (1998) Skin resurfacing. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore

  18. Duffy D (1998) Alpha hydroxyl acids/trichloroacetic acids, risk benefit strategies. J Dermatol Surg 24:181–189

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Eller JJ, Wolff S (1941) Skin peeling and scarification. JAMA 116:934–938

    Google Scholar 

  20. Garcia A, Fulton JE Jr (1996) The combination of glycolic acid versus hydroquinone or kojic acid for the treatment of melasma and related conditions. Dermatol Surg 22:443–447

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Gillitzer R (2002) Modernes Wundmanagement. Hautarzt 53:130–145

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gleason MT, Gosselin RF, Hodge HC et al. (1998) Clinical toxicology of commercial products. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, pp 189–192

  23. Gross BG, Maschek F (1980) Phenol chemosurgery for removal of deep facial wrinkles. Int J Dermatol 19:159–164

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kligman AM, Baker TJ, Gordon HJ (1985) Long term histologic follow-up of phenol face peels. Plast Reconst Surg 67:652–659

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kligman D, Kligman AM (1998) Salicylic acid peels for the treatment of photoaging. Dermatol Surg 24:325–328

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Litton C (1962) Chemical face lifting. Plast Reconstr Surg 29:371–380

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Litton C, Trinidad G (1981) Complications of chemical face peeling as evaluated by a questionnaire. Plast Reconstr Surg 67:738–744

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. MacKee G, Karp F (1952) The treatment of post-acne scars with phenol 64:456–459

  29. Malony BP, Millman B, Monheit G, Mc Collough EG (1998) The etiology of prolonged erythema after chemical peel. Dermatol Surg 24:337–341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mandy S (1986) Tretinoin in the preoperative and postoperative management of dermabrasion. J Am Acad Dermatol 15:878–879

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Monheit GD (1995) Facial resurfacing may trigger the herpes simplex virus. Cosmet Dermatol 8:9–16

    Google Scholar 

  32. Monheit GD (1996) Skin preparation: an essential step before chemical peeling or laser resurfacing. Cosmet Dermatol 9:13–14

    Google Scholar 

  33. Monheit GD (1996) Combination medium-depth peeling: the Jessner’s and TCA peel. Facial Plast Surg 12:117–124

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Monheit GD, Zeitouni NC (1997) Skin resurfacing for photoaging: laser resurfacing versus chemical peeling. Dermatol 10:11–22

    Google Scholar 

  35. Monheit GD, Chastain MA (2001) Chemical peels. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 9:239–255

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Morrow DM (1992) Chemical peeling of eyelids and periorbital area. J Dermatol Surg Oncol 18:102–110

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Moy LS, Peace S, Moy RL (1996) Comparison of the effect of various chemical peeling agents in a mini-pig model. Dermatol Surg 22:429–432

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Nelson BR et al. (1995) Pilot histologic and ultrastructural study of medium-depth chemical facial peels on dermal collagen in patients with actinically damaged skin. J Am Acad Dermatol 32:472–478

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Peikert JM, Krywonis NA, Rest EB, Zachary CB (1994) The efficacy of various degreasing agents used in trichloroacetic acid peels. J Dermatol Surg Oncol 20:728–742

    Google Scholar 

  40. Rubenstein R, Roenigk HH Jr, Stegman SJ, Hanke WC (1986) Atypical keloids after dermabrasion of patients taking isotretinoin. J Am Acad Dermatol 15:280–285

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Rubin MG (1995) Trichloroacetic acid peels. In: Rubin GM (ed) Manual of chemical peels. JB Lippincott, Philadelphia, pp 118–119

  42. Spira M, Dahl C, Freeman R et al. (1970) Chemosurgery—a histological study. Plast Reconstr Surg 45:247–253

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Stegman SJ (1982) A comparative histologic study of the effects of three peeling agents and dermabrasion on normal and sun-damaged skin. Aesth Plast Surg 6:123–135

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Urkov J (1946) Surface defects of skin: treatment by controlled exfoliation. Ill Med J 89:75–81

    Google Scholar 

  45. Van Scott EJ, Yu RU (1984) Hyperkeratinization, corneocyte cohesion and alpha hydroxy acids. J Acad Dermatol 11:867–879

    Google Scholar 

  46. Witheiler DD, Lawrence N, Cox SE et al. (1997) Long-term efficacy and safety of Jessner’s solution and 35% trichloroacetic acid vs 5% fluorouracil in the treatment of widespread facial actinic keratoses. Dermatol Surg 23:191–196

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt:

Der korrespondierende Autor versichert, dass keine Verbindungen mit einer Firma, deren Produkt in dem Artikel genannt ist, oder einer Firma, die ein Konkurrenzprodukt vertreibt, bestehen.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. München

    L. Wiest

  2. Residenzstraße 7, 80333 , München

    L. Wiest

Authors
  1. L. Wiest
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. Wiest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wiest, L. Chemical Peels in der ästhetischen Dermatologie. Hautarzt 55, 611–620 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00105-004-0734-3

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00105-004-0734-3

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation