Bioengineering Methods and Skin Aging

  • Francesca Giusti
  • Stefania Seidenari
Living reference work entry


During the last decade, skin aging has become an area of increasing research interest, because of the prolongation of life span in modern society.

Skin aging is an uneven process characterized by epidermal and dermal disorders, accompanied by many clinical signs, such as skin dryness, color changes, loss of elasticity, wrinkles, and risk of developing skin cancers. The elderly appearance of the skin depends on a combination of intrinsic or chronological aging, modulated by genetically predisposing factors, and extrinsic aging or photoaging, due to environmental factors, mainly UV exposure, and also wind, relative humidity, pollution, and so on. The effects of the UV radiations on sun-exposed sites are superimposed on the morphological, biochemical, and functional changes occurring with aging, making distinction between the two phenomena hard.


Skin Thickness Facial Skin Hormonal Replacement Therapy Skin Site Skin Aging 
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.


  1. 1.
    Fluhr JW, Pfistener S, Gloor M. Direct comparison of skin physiology in children and adults with bioengineering methods. Pediatr Dermatol. 2000;17:436–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Diktein S, Hartzshtark A, Bercovici P. The dependence of low pressure indentation, slackness, and surface pH on age in forehead skin of women. J Soc Cosmet Chem. 1984;35:221–8.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wilhelm KP, Cua AB, Maibach HI. Skin aging: effect on transepidermal water loss, stratum corneum hydration, skin surface pH and casual sebum content. Arch Dermatol. 1991;127:1806–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Conti A, Schiavi ME, Seidenari S. Capacitance, transepidermal water loss and casual level of sebum in healthy subjects in relation to site, sex and age. Int J Cosmet Sci. 1995;17:77–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Callens A et al. Does hormonal aging exist? A study on the influence of different hormone therapy on the skin of postmenopaused women using non-invasive measurement techniques. Dermatology. 1996;193:289–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Caisey L et al. Influence of age and hormone replacement therapy on the functional properties of the lips. Skin Res Technol. 2008;14:220–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Richard S, de Rigal J, Lacharriere O, Berardesca E, Leveque JL. Noninvasive measurement of the effect of lifetime exposure to the sun on the aged skin. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed. 1994;10:164–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Warren R. Age, sunlight, and facial skin: a histologic and quantitative study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1991;25:751–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kikuchi-Numagami K et al. Functional and morphological studies of photodamaged skin on the hands of middle-aged Japanese golfers. Eur J Dermatol. 2000;10(4):277–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guinot C et al. Effect of hormonal replacement therapy on cutaneous biophysical properties of menopausal women. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2002;129:1129–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Marks R, Edwards C. The measurement of photodamage. Br J Dermatol. 1992;127(41):7–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kelly RI et al. The effects of aging on cutaneous microvasculature. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1995;33:749–56.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tolino MA, Wilkin JK. Aging and cutaneous vascular thermoregulation responses. J Invest Dermatol. 1988;90:613.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ishihara M et al. Blood flow. In: Kligman AM, Takase Y, editors. Cutaneous aging. Tokyo: University of Tokyo press; 1988. p. 167–81.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hatzis J. The wrinkle and its measurement-a skin surface profilometric method. Micron. 2004;35:210–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Quan MB, Edwards C, Marks R. Non-invasive in vivo techniques to differentiate photodamage and ageing in human skin. Acta Dermatol Venereol. 1997;77(6):416–9.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee HK, Seo YK, Baek JH, Koh JS. Comparison between ultrasonography (Dermascan C version 3) and transparency profilometry (Skin Visiometer SV600). Skin Res Technol. 2008;14:8–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    de Rigal J et al. Assessment of aging of the human skin by in vivo ultrasonic imaging. J Invest Dermatol. 1989;93:621–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Seidenari S, Pagnoni A, Di Nardo A, Giannetti A. Echographic evaluation with image analysis of normal skin: variation according to age and sex. Skin Pharmacol. 1995;7:201–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tan CY, Stathan B, Marks R, Payne PA. Skin thickness measurement by pulsed ultrasound: its reproducibility, validation and variability. Br J Dermatol. 1982;106:657–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Escoffier C et al. Age-related mechanical properties of human skin: an in vivo study. J Invest Dermatol. 1989;93:353–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Denda M, Takahasi M. Measurement of facial skin thickness by ultrasound method. J Soc Cosmet Chem Jpn. 1990;23:316–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Takema Y, Yorimoto Y, Kawai M, Imokawa G. Age-related changes in the elastic properties and thickness of human facial skin. Br J Dermatol. 1994;131:641–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lasagni C, Seidenari S. Echographic assessment of age-dependent variations of skin thickness. A study on 162 subjects. Skin Res Technol. 1995;1:81–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gniadecka M, Jemec GBE. Quantitative evaluation of chronological ageing and photoageing in vivo: studies on skin echogenicity and thickness. Br J Dermatol. 1998;139:815–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pellacani G, Seidenari S. Variations in facial skin thickness and echogenicity with site and age. Acta Dermatol Venereol. 1999;79:366–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Leveque JL et al. Influence of chronic sun exposure on some biophysical parameters of the human skin: an in vivo study. J Cutan Aging Cosmet Dermatol. 1989;1:123–7.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Adhoute H, de Rigal J, Marchand JP, Privat Y, Leveque JL. Influence of age and sun exposure on the biophysical properties of the human skin: an in vivo study. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed. 1992;9:99–103.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nishimura M, Tuji T. Measurement of skin elasticity with a new suction device. Jpn J Dermatol. 1990;102:1111–7.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shuster S, Black MM, McVitie E. The influence of age and sex on skin thickness, skin collagen and density. Br J Dermatol. 1975;93:639.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pellacani G, Giusti F, Seidenari S. Ultrasound assessment of skin ageing. In: Serup J, Jemec GBE, Grove GL, editors. Non-invasive methods and the skin. Boca Raton: CRC press; 2006. p. 511–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Altmeyer P, Hoffmann K, Stucker M, Goertz S, El-Gammal S. General phenomena of ultrasound in dermatology. In: Altmeyer P, El-Gammal S, Hoffmann K, editors. Ultrasound in dermatology. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer; 1992. p. 55–79.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gniadecka M, Serup J, Sondergaard J. Age-related diurnal changes of dermal oedema: evaluation by high frequency ultrasound. Br J Dermatol. 1994;131:849–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tsukahara K et al. Age-related alterations of echogenicity in Japanese skin. Dermatology. 2000;200:303–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hoffmann K, Dirschka T, El-Gammal S, Altmeyer P. Assessment of actinic elastosis by means of high-frequency sonography. In: Marks R, Plewing G, editors. The Environmental Threat to the Skin. London: Martin Dunitz; 1991. p. 83–90.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Richard S et al. Characterization of the skin in vivo by high resolution magnetic resonance imaging: water behaviour and age-related effects. J Invest Dermatol. 1993;100:705–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Oikarinen A. Aging of the skin connective tissue: how to measure the biochemical and mechanical properties of aging dermis. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed. 1994;10:47–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sandby-Moller J, Wulf HC. Ultrasonographic subepidermal low-echogenic band, dependence of age and body site. Skin Res Technol. 2004;10:57–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gniadecka M. Effects of ageing on dermal echogenicity. Skin Res Technol. 2001;7:204–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nakahigashi N, Sugai T. Assessment of degeneration by sun exposure using ultrasonic imaging with dermascan C. Skin Res. 1996;38:25–30.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Seidenari S, Giusti G, Bertoni L, Magnoni C, Pellacani G. Thickness and echogenicity of the skin in children as assessed by 20-MHz ultrasound. Dermatology. 2000;201:218–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rajadhyaksha M, Gonzalez S, Avislan JM, Anderson RR, Webb RH. In vivo confocal laser scanning microscopy of human skin II: advances in instrumentation and comparison with histology. J Invest Dermatol. 1999;113:292–303.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Branzan AL, Landthaler M, Szeimies RM. In vivo confocal laser scanning microscopy in dermatology. Lasers Med Sci. 2007;22:73–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sauermann K et al. Age-related changes in human skin investigated with histometric measurements by confocal laser scanning microscopy in vivo. Skin Res Technol. 2002;8:52–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sauermann K, Jaspers S, Koop U, Wenck H. Topically applied vitamin C increases the density of dermal papillae in aged human skin. Dermatology. 2004;4:13–8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Neerken S, Lucassen GW, Bisschop MA, Lenderink E, Nuijs TA. Characterization of age-related effects in human skin: a comparative study that applies confocal laser scanning microscopy and optical coherence tomography. J Biomed Opt. 2004;9:274–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Bernstein EF et al. Long-term sun exposure alters the collagen of the papillary dermis. Comparison of sun-protected and photoaged skin by northern analysis, immunohistochemical staining and confocal 3laser scanning microscopy. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1996;34:209–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of DermatologyUniversity of Modena and Reggio EmiliaModenaItaly

Personalised recommendations