대한화장품학회지 (Journal of the Society of Cosmetic Scientists of Korea)

  • 제38권1호
  • /
  • Pages.43-50
  • /
  • 2012
  • /
  • 1226-2587(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-9507(eISSN)
대한화장품학회 (Society of Cosmetic Scientists of Korea)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

화장품 원료에 의해 유도되는 미세 피부반응에 대한 기기적 평가 연구

Instrumental Assessments of Sub-clinical Skin Reactions induced by Cosmetic Ingredients

  • 안상미 ((주)더마프로 피부과학연구소) ;
  • 이미영 ((주)더마프로 피부과학연구소) ;
  • 백지훈 ((주)더마프로 피부과학연구소) ;
  • 함혜인 ((주)더마프로 피부과학연구소) ;
  • 부용출 (경북대학교 의학전문대학원 분자의학교실 세포기질연구소) ;
  • 고재숙 ((주)더마프로 피부과학연구소)
  • An, Sang-Mi (Dermapro Skin Research Center, Dermapro Co., LTD.) ;
  • Lee, Mi-Young (Dermapro Skin Research Center, Dermapro Co., LTD.) ;
  • Baek, Ji-Hwoon (Dermapro Skin Research Center, Dermapro Co., LTD.) ;
  • Ham, Hye-In (Dermapro Skin Research Center, Dermapro Co., LTD.) ;
  • Boo, Yong-Chool (Department of molecular Medicine and Cell and Matrix Research Institute, Kyungpook National University School of Medicine) ;
  • Koh, Jae-Sook (Dermapro Skin Research Center, Dermapro Co., LTD.)
  • 투고 : 2011.11.03
  • 심사 : 2012.02.28
  • 발행 : 2012.03.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

인체피부에서 화장품이나 화장품 원료의 안전성시험은 대체로 육안평가로 이루어져왔다. 하지만, 피부반응 초기의 미세한 변화에 대해서 육안으로는 감지하지 못하는 경우가 많다. 따라서, 본 연구에서는 수종의 화장품 원료에 의해 유발되는 홍반반응에 대해 육안평가뿐 아니라, 레이저도플러혈류이미지(LDPI) 측정장비를 이용한 혈류변화 측정, $Vapometer^{(R)}$를 이용한 경피수분손실량(TEWL) 측정, 분광광도계를 이용한 피부색 측정과 같은 기기평가를 병행하여 비교하였다. 30명의 건강한 여성 피험자를 대상으로 오일류 7종, 계면활성제류 6종, 보습제류 5종을 피험자의 등 부위에24 h 폐쇄첩포(D0)하여 피부반응을 유도하였고 첩포 제거 후 30 min (D1), 24 h (D2)에 육안평가와 기기평가를 각각 실시하였다. 육안평가 결과, 프로필렌글라이콜을 제외한 모든 오일류와 보습제류는 저자극 수준의 피부반응(반응도 0+ - 2.9+)을 보인 반면, 프로필렌글라이콜과 모든 계면활성제류는 중자극에서 강자극 수준의 피부반응(반응도 3+ - 5+)을 보였다. 기기측정 결과, 육안평가에서 저자극 범주의 피부반응에 대해서 혈류량이나 피부색보다 경피수분손실량이 가장 민감하게 피부변화를 감지하였다.

The safety of cosmetics or cosmetic ingredients on human skin is generally evaluated by visual assessment but some early subtle skin changes may not be noticed by the naked eyes. Thus, the present study was conducted to detect skin reactions induced by mildly irritating cosmetic ingredients by using a laser Doppler perfusion imager (LDPI) method that measures blood flow, a $Vapometer^{(R)}$ that measure strans epidermal water loss (TEWL), and a spectrophotometer that measures the skin color as the erythema values ($a^*$). Visual assessment showed that all tested oils and humectants except propylene glycol belong to the low skin irritation ranges (grades 0+ to 2.9+) while all tested surfactants and propylene glycol belong to the moderate-to strong-skin irritation ranges (grades 3+ to 5+). Among three instrumental methods, TEWL assessment appeared to be more sensitive than spectrophotometric or LDPI method and suitable for the detection of subtle skin response invisible to the naked eye (grades 0+ to 2.9+). Skin reactions of grade 3+ to 5+ could be detected by all three instrumental methods. In conclusion, the current study suggested that the sub-clinical skin reactions due to mild irritants contained in cosmetics can be best assessed by TEWL measurements.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. N. I. Denig, A. W. Hoke, and H. I. Maibach, Irritant contact dermatitis. Clues to causes, clinical characteristics, and control, Postgrad. Med., 103(5), 199 (1998).
  2. T. Agner and J. Serup, Contact thermography for assessment of skin damage due to experimental irritants, Acta. Derm. Venereol., 68(3), 192 (1988).
  3. C. Blichmann and J. Serup, Assessment of skin moisture. Measurement of electrical conductance, capacitance and transepidermal water loss, Acta. Derm. Venereol., 68(4), 284 (1988).
  4. C. M. De Jongh, M. M. Verberk, C. E. Withagen, J. J. Jacobs, T. Rustemeyer, and S. Kezic, Stratum corneum cytokines and skin irritation response to sodium lauryl sulfate, Contact dermatitis, 54(6), 325 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0105-1873.2006.00848.x
  5. A. T. J. Goon, Y. H. Leow, Y. H. Chan, and C. L. Goh, Correlation between laser Doppler perfusion imaging and visual scoring of patch test sites in subjects with experimentally induced allergic and irritant contact reactions, Skin Res. Technol., 10(1), 64 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0846.2004.00060.x
  6. J. Moskovitz, M. B. Yim, and P. B. chock, Free radicals and disease, Arch. Biochem. Biophys., 397(2), 354 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1006/abbi.2001.2692
  7. Y. Ishihara, M. Oka, M. Tsunakawa, K. Tomita, M. Hatori, H. Yamamoto, H. Kamei, T. Miyaki, M. Konishi, and T. Oki, Melanostatin, a new melanin synthesis inhibitor. Production, isolation, chemical properties, structure and biological activity, J. Antibiot., 44(1), 25 (1991). https://doi.org/10.7164/antibiotics.44.25
  8. C. H. Lee and H. I. Maibach, The sodium lauryl sulfate model: an overview, Contact dermatitis, 33(1), 1 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1995.tb00438.x
  9. C. W. Blichmann and J. Serup, Assessment of skin moisture. Measurement of electrical conductance, capacitance and transepidermal water loss, Acta. Derm. Venereol., 68(4), 284 (1988).
  10. J. Serup and T. Agner, 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(4), 267 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2230.1990.tb02087.x
  11. B. Staberg and J. Serup, Allergic and irritant skin reactions evaluated by laser Doppler flowmetry, Contact dermatitis, 18(1), 40 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1988.tb05488.x
  12. J. Serup and B. Staberg, Ultrasound for assessment of allergic and irritant patch test reactions, Contact dermatitis, 17(2), 80 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1987.tb02665.x
  13. J. Aramaki, C. Loffler, S. Kawana, I. Effendy, R. Happle, and H. Loffler, Irritant patch testing with sodium lauryl sulphate: interrelation between concentration and exposure time, Br. J. Dermatol., 145(5), 704 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2133.2001.04442.x
  14. P. Elsner, A. Barel, and E. Berardesca, Skin bioengineering: techniques and applications in dermatology and cosmetology, 26, S Karger Pub, (1998).
  15. A. J. Baillie, P. A. Biagioni, A. Forsyth, J. J. Garioch and D. McPherson, Thermographic assessment of patch-test responses, Br. J. Dermatol., 122(3), 351 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.1990.tb08283.x
  16. E. Gottschalk and G. McEwen, International Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary and Handbook, The Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association, 1216, Washington D.C. (2006).
  17. M. Berdick, The role of fats and oils in cosmetics, J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc., 49(7), 406 (1972). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02582522
  18. M. M. Rieger and L. D. Rhein, Surfactants in cosmetics, 68, CRC press, Washington D.C. (1997).
  19. L. Osipow, A Buffering Humectant for Cosmetics, Drug Cosmetic. Ind., 88(4), 438 (1961).
  20. R. G. D. Clinical Research, Declaration of Helsinki, (1991).
  21. J. Schanda, Colorimetry: Understanding the CIE system, Wiley-interscience, (2007).
  22. G. W. Mack, Assessment of cutaneous blood flow by using topographical perfusion mapping techniques, J. Appl. Physiol., 85(1), 353 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1152/jappl.1998.85.1.353
  23. M. York, H. A. Griffiths, E. Whittle, and D. A. Basketter, Evaluation of a human patch test for the identification and classification of skin irritation potential, Contact dermatitis, 34(3), 204 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1996.tb02175.x
  24. M. A. Farage, S. Meyer, and D. Walter, Evaluation of modifications of the traditional patch test in assessing the chemical irritation potential of feminine hygiene products, Skin Res. Technol., 10(2), 73 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0846.2004.00054.x
  25. P. J. Frosch and A. M. Kligman, The soap chamber test. A new method for assessing the irritancy of soaps, J. Am. Acad. Dermatol., 1(1), 35 (1979).
  26. A. Curry, S. Getting, and G. McEwen, CTFA technical guidelines: safety testing guidelines, The Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association, Washington D.C. 2002, 3 (1991).
  27. M. P. Vinardell and M. Mitjans, Alternative methods for eye and skin irritation tests: an overview, J. Pharm. Sci., 97(1), 46 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.21088
  28. M. Loden, I. Buraczewska, and F. Edlund, Irritation potential of bath and shower oils before and after use: a double-blind randomized study, Br. J. Dermatol., 150(6), 1142 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0007-0963.2004.05923.x