Noninvasive Techniques for Quantification of Contact Dermatitis

  • Jørgen Serup


Skin Surface Contact Dermatitis Sodium Lauryl Sulphate Noninvasive Technique Laser Doppler Flowmetry 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Frosch PJ, Kligman AM (eds) (1993) Noninvasive methods for the quantification of skin functions. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goldsmith LA (ed) (1983) Biochemistry and physiology of the skin. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Serup J, Jemec G (eds) (1995) Handbook of non-invasive methods and the skin. CRC, Boca Raton, Fla.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Agache P, Humbert P (eds) (2004) Measuring the skin. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berardesca E, Elsner P, Wilhelm K-P, Maibach HI (eds) (1995) Bioengineering of the skin: methods and instrumentation. CRC, Boca Raton, Fla.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wilhelm K-P, Elsner P, Berardesca E, Maibach HI (eds) (1997) Bioengineering of the skin: skin surface imaging and analysis. CRC, Boca Raton, Fla.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Elsner P, Barel AO, Berardesca E, Gabard B, Serup J (eds) (1998) Skin bioengineering techniques and applications in dermatology and cosmetology. Karger, Basel, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Berardesca E, Maibach HI (1988) Bioengineering and the patch test. Contact Dermatitis 18:3–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Diffey BL, Oliver RJ, Farr PM (1984) A portable instrument for quantifying erythema induced by ultraviolet radiation. Br J Dermatol 111:663–672PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Robertson AR (1977) The CIE 1976 color difference formulas. Color Res Appl 2:7–11Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Serup J, Agner T (1990) Colorimetric quantification of erythema — a comparison of two colorimeters (Lange Micro Color and Minolta Chroma Meter CR-200) with a clinical scoring scheme and laser-Doppler flowmetry. Clin Exp Dermatol 15:267–272PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Slue WE (1989) Photographic cures for dermatologic disorders. Arch Dermatol 125:960–962PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Grove GL, Grove MJ (1989) Objective methods for assessing skin surface topography noninvasively. In: Leveque J-L (ed) Cutaneous investigation in health and disease. Dekker, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Serup J, Winther A, Blichmann C (1989) A simple method for the study of scale pattern and effects of a moisturizer: qualitative and quantitative evaluation by D-Squame tape compared with parameters of epidermal hydration. Clin Exp Dermatol 14:277–282PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leveque J-L, de Rigal J (1983) Impedance methods for studying skin moisturization. J Soc Cosmet Chem 34:419–428Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tagami H (1989) Impedance measurement for evaluation of the hydration state of the skin surface. In: Leveque J-L (ed) Cutaneous investigation in health and disease. Dekker, New York, pp 79–111Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Blichmann C, Serup J (1988) Assessment of skin moisture. Measurement of electrical conductance, capacitance and transepidermal water loss. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 68:284–290PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Agner T, Serup J (1988) Comparison of two electrical methods for measurement of skin hydration. An experimental study on irritant patch test reactions. Bioeng Skin 4:263–269Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stender IM, Blichmann C, Serup J (1990) Effects of oil and water baths on the hydration state of the epidermis. Clin Exp Dermatol 15:206–209PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nilsson GE (1977) Measurement of water exchange through skin. Med Biol Eng Comput 15:209–218PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Spencer TS (1990) Transepidermal water loss: methods and applications. In: Rietschel RL, Spencer TS (eds) Methods for cutaneous investigation. Dekker, New York, pp 191–217Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pinnagoda J, Tupker RA, Agner T, Serup J (1990) Guidelines for transepidermal water loss (TEWL) measurement. A report from the standardization group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 22:164–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Agner T, Serup J (1989) Seasonal variation of skin resistance to irritants. Br J Dermatol 121:323–328PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Agner T, Serup J (1988) Contact thermography for assessment of skin damage due to experimental irritants. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 68:192–195PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Baillie AJ, Biagioni PA, Forsyth A, Garioch JJ, McPherson D (1990) Thermographic assessment of patch-test responses. Br J Dermatol 122:351–360PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Serup J, Staberg B (1987) Ultrasound for assessment of allergic and irritant patch test reactions. Contact Dermatitis 17:80–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Serup J (1992) Ten years’ experience with high-frequency ultrasound examination of the skin: development and refinement of technique and equipment. In: Altmeyer P, Hoffman K (eds) Ultrasound in dermatology. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 41–54Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Peters K, Serup J (1987) Papulo-vesicular count for the rating of allergic patch test reactions. A simple technique based on polysulfide rubber replica. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 67:491–495PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Blichmann C, Serup J (1987) Hydration studies on scaly hand eczema. Contact Dermatitis 16:155–159PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Serup J, Staberg B (1987) Differentiation of allergic and irritant reactions by transepidermal water loss. Contact Dermatitis 16:129–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Serup J (1987) Contact thermography — towards the Sherlock Holmes magnifying glass for solving allergic and irritant patch test reactions? Contact Dermatitis 17:61–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Staberg B, Serup J (1984) Patch test responses evaluated by cutaneous blood flow measurements. Arch Dermatol 120:741–743PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Staberg B, Serup J (1988) Allergic and irritant skin reactions evaluated by laser Doppler flowmetry. Contact Dermatitis 18:40–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Serup J, Staberg B, Klemp P (1984) Quantification of cutaneous oedema in patch test reactions by measurement of skin thickness with high-frequency pulsed ultrasound. Contact Dermatitis 10:88–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Willis CM, Stephens CJM, Wilkinson JD (1989) Epidermal damage induced by irritants in man. A light and electron microscopy study. J Invest Dermatol 93:695–700PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bjørnberg A (1968) Skin reactions to primary irritants in patients with hand eczema. An investigation with matched controls. Thesis, Oscar Isacson, Göteborg, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Frosch P (1985) Hautirritation und empfindliche Haut. Grosse, Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    van der Valk PGM (1983) Water vapour loss measurements on human skin. Thesis, State University Hospital, Gröningen, the NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pinnagoda J (1990) Transepidermal water loss. Its role in the assessment of susceptibility to the development of irritant contact dermatitis. Thesis, State University Hospital, Gröningen, the NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tupker RA (1990) The influence of detergents on the human skin. A study on factors determining the individual susceptibility assessed by transepidermal water loss. Thesis, State University Hospital, Gröningen, the NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    De Boer EM (1989) Occupational dermatitis by metalworking fluids. An epidemiological study and an investigation on skin irritation using laser Doppler flowmetry. Thesis, Vrije University, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Agner T (1991) Noninvasive measuring methods for the investigation of irritant contact dermatitis. Thesis, University of Copenhagen, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Agner T, Serup J (1990) Sodium lauryl sulphate for irritant patch testing. A dose response study using bioengineering methods for determination of skin irritation. J Invest Dermatol 95:543–547PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Agner T, Serup J (1987) Skin reactions to irritants assessed by polysulfide rubber replica. Contact Dermatitis 17:205–211PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Agner T, Serup J (1990) Individual and instrumental variations in irritant patch-test reactions — clinical evaluation and quantification by bioengineering methods. Clin Exp Dermatol 15:29–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bircher AJ, Guy RH, Maibach HI (1990) Laser-Doppler blood flowmetry. Skin pharmacology and dermatology. In: Shepherd AP, Öberg PÅ (eds) Laser-Doppler blood flowmetry. Kluwer, Boston, Mass., pp 141–174Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Frosch PJ, Kligman AM (1982) Recognition of chemically vulnerable and delicate skin. In: Frost PH, Horwith SN (eds) Principles of cosmetics for the dermatologist. Mosby, St Louis, Mo., pp 287–296Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Murahata RI, Crowe DM, Roheim JR (1986) The use of transepidermal water loss to measure and predict the irritation response to surfactants. Int J Cosmet Sci 8:225–231PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Frosch P, Wissing C (1982) Cutaneous sensitivity to ultraviolet light and chemical irritants. Arch Dermatol Res 272:269–278PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Agner T, Damm P, Skouby SO (1991) Menstrual cycle and skin reactivity. J Am Acad Dermatol 24:566–570PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Werner Y, Lindberg M (1985) Transepidermal water loss in dry and clinically normal skin in patients with atopic dermatitis. Arch Dermatol Res 65:102–105Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Agner T (1991) Skin susceptibility in uninvolved skin of hand eczema patients and healthy controls. Br J Dermatol 125:140–146PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Agner T (1990) Susceptibility to sodium lauryl sulphate in patients with atopic dermatitis and controls. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 71:296–300Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Tupker RA, Willis C, Berardesca E, Lee CH, Fartasch M, Agner T, Serup J (1997) Guidelines on sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) exposure tests. A report from the Standardization Group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 37:53–69PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Serup J, Staberg B (1985) Quantification of weal reactions with laser Doppler flowmetry. Comparative blood flow measurements of the oedematous centre and the perilesional flare of skin-prick histamine weals. Allergy 40:233–237PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Van Neste D (1991) Skin response to histamine: reproducibility study of the dry skin prick test method and of the evaluation of microvascular changes with laser Doppler flowmetry. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 71:25–28Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Serup J (1984) Diameter, thickness, area, and volume of skin-prick histamine weals. Allergy 39:359–364PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Van Neste D, Ghys L, Antoine JL, Rihoux JP (1989) Pharmacological modulation by cetirizine and atropine of the histamine-and methacholine-induced wheals and flares in human skin. Skin Pharmacol 2:93–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Van Neste D (1990) Skin response to histamine dry skin prick test: influence of duration of the skin prick on clinical parameters and on skin blood flow monitoring. J Dermatol Sci 1:435–439PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Leroy T, Tasset C, Valentin B, Van Neste D (1998) Comparison of the effects of cetirizine and ebastine on the skin response to histamine iontophoresis monitored with laser Doppler flowmetry. Dermatology 197:146–151PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Agner T, Serup J (1989) Quantification of the DMSO response, a test for assessment of sensitive skin. Clin Exp Dermatol 14:214–217PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jørgen Serup
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of DermatologyBispebjerg HospitalCopenhagen NVDenmark

Personalised recommendations