Comparison between ultrasonography (Dermascan C version 3) and transparency profilometry (Skin Visiometer SV600)
Background/purpose: A recently developed method to estimate skin smoothness is the replica method, which may have the limitation of the roughness difference of actual skin due to the skin‐replicating process. Therefore, observation of dermal layer change is very important. For this purpose, ultrason...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Skin research and technology 2008-02, Vol.14 (1), p.8-12 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 12 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 8 |
| container_title | Skin research and technology |
| container_volume | 14 |
| creator | Lee, H. K. Seo, Y. K. Baek, J. H. Koh, J. S. |
| description | Background/purpose: A recently developed method to estimate skin smoothness is the replica method, which may have the limitation of the roughness difference of actual skin due to the skin‐replicating process. Therefore, observation of dermal layer change is very important. For this purpose, ultrasonic display equipment is generally used. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the correlation between skin roughness and dermal density in wrinkle evaluation.
Methods: We evaluated the crow's feet of 95 Korean females using mechanical assessments; Skin‐Visiometer SV 600 and Dermascan C. Transparency profilometry (Skin Visiometer) use a very thin skin print, which allows parallel light to pass through and is analyzed immediately after production. High‐frequency (20 MHz) ultrasonography (Dermascan C) enables non‐invasive evaluation of skin thickness and echo density.
Results: We found a correlation between skin roughness and dermal density. Particularly, we found a significant correlation between skin roughness (R2) and dermal thickness. Also, we found a significant negative correlation between dermal density and dermal thickness (P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1600-0846.2007.00257.x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_24P</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70235739</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>70235739</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4707-9fcd35b19d712808adbcf2382c4ec11a6d31aff27f4d405565b612b57b9bad4f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE1PGzEQhq2qVUmhf6HyqSqHXcb2er0r9VJCIUgBJAK0N8vrtVuH_aq9Kcm_x2kiesUXW-PnmRm9CGECKYnnZJmSHCCBIstTCiBSAMpFun6DJi8fb9EESigTwenPA_QhhCUA8JKw9-iAFJQQXuYTNEz7dlDehb7DlRmfjOnwqhm9ioX-l1fD7w3-cmZ8q4JWHZ7iv8YHF2F2jFVX40h2ITYwnd7gwffWNX1rRh-txaPr8IOLdCwYjxcPcbXjI_TOqiaYj_v7EN2ff7-bzpL5zcXl9Ns80ZkAkZRW14xXpKwFoQUUqq60paygOjOaEJXXjChrqbBZnQHnOa9yQisuqrJSdWbZIfq86xuX-rMyYZStC9o0jepMvwpSAGVcsDKCxQ7Uvg_BGysH71rlN5KA3KYtl3IbqtyGKrdpy39py3VUP-1nrKrW1P_FfbwR-LoDnlxjNq9uLBe3d_ER9WSnuzCa9Yuu_KPMBRNc_ri-kDmfXc1O52fymj0Ddkyd8g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>70235739</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison between ultrasonography (Dermascan C version 3) and transparency profilometry (Skin Visiometer SV600)</title><source>Wiley Online Library Open Access</source><creator>Lee, H. K. ; Seo, Y. K. ; Baek, J. H. ; Koh, J. S.</creator><creatorcontrib>Lee, H. K. ; Seo, Y. K. ; Baek, J. H. ; Koh, J. S.</creatorcontrib><description>Background/purpose: A recently developed method to estimate skin smoothness is the replica method, which may have the limitation of the roughness difference of actual skin due to the skin‐replicating process. Therefore, observation of dermal layer change is very important. For this purpose, ultrasonic display equipment is generally used. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the correlation between skin roughness and dermal density in wrinkle evaluation.
Methods: We evaluated the crow's feet of 95 Korean females using mechanical assessments; Skin‐Visiometer SV 600 and Dermascan C. Transparency profilometry (Skin Visiometer) use a very thin skin print, which allows parallel light to pass through and is analyzed immediately after production. High‐frequency (20 MHz) ultrasonography (Dermascan C) enables non‐invasive evaluation of skin thickness and echo density.
Results: We found a correlation between skin roughness and dermal density. Particularly, we found a significant correlation between skin roughness (R2) and dermal thickness. Also, we found a significant negative correlation between dermal density and dermal thickness (P<0.05).
Conclusion: Therefore, the ultrasonography system may be considered a very useful method in wrinkle evaluation with the transparency profilometry. However, further study will be required.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0909-752X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1600-0846</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0846.2007.00257.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18211596</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; dermal intensity ; dermal thickness ; Dermis - anatomy & histology ; Dermis - diagnostic imaging ; Dermis - pathology ; Female ; Humans ; Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods ; Middle Aged ; Silicone Gels ; Skin - anatomy & histology ; Skin - diagnostic imaging ; Skin - pathology ; Skin Aging - pathology ; skin roughness ; Ultrasonography - methods ; wrinkle</subject><ispartof>Skin research and technology, 2008-02, Vol.14 (1), p.8-12</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4707-9fcd35b19d712808adbcf2382c4ec11a6d31aff27f4d405565b612b57b9bad4f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4707-9fcd35b19d712808adbcf2382c4ec11a6d31aff27f4d405565b612b57b9bad4f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1600-0846.2007.00257.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1600-0846.2007.00257.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,11562,27924,27925,45574,45575,46052,46476</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Fj.1600-0846.2007.00257.x$$EView_record_in_Wiley-Blackwell$$FView_record_in_$$GWiley-Blackwell</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18211596$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lee, H. K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seo, Y. K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baek, J. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koh, J. S.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison between ultrasonography (Dermascan C version 3) and transparency profilometry (Skin Visiometer SV600)</title><title>Skin research and technology</title><addtitle>Skin Res Technol</addtitle><description>Background/purpose: A recently developed method to estimate skin smoothness is the replica method, which may have the limitation of the roughness difference of actual skin due to the skin‐replicating process. Therefore, observation of dermal layer change is very important. For this purpose, ultrasonic display equipment is generally used. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the correlation between skin roughness and dermal density in wrinkle evaluation.
Methods: We evaluated the crow's feet of 95 Korean females using mechanical assessments; Skin‐Visiometer SV 600 and Dermascan C. Transparency profilometry (Skin Visiometer) use a very thin skin print, which allows parallel light to pass through and is analyzed immediately after production. High‐frequency (20 MHz) ultrasonography (Dermascan C) enables non‐invasive evaluation of skin thickness and echo density.
Results: We found a correlation between skin roughness and dermal density. Particularly, we found a significant correlation between skin roughness (R2) and dermal thickness. Also, we found a significant negative correlation between dermal density and dermal thickness (P<0.05).
Conclusion: Therefore, the ultrasonography system may be considered a very useful method in wrinkle evaluation with the transparency profilometry. However, further study will be required.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>dermal intensity</subject><subject>dermal thickness</subject><subject>Dermis - anatomy & histology</subject><subject>Dermis - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Dermis - pathology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Silicone Gels</subject><subject>Skin - anatomy & histology</subject><subject>Skin - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Skin - pathology</subject><subject>Skin Aging - pathology</subject><subject>skin roughness</subject><subject>Ultrasonography - methods</subject><subject>wrinkle</subject><issn>0909-752X</issn><issn>1600-0846</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkE1PGzEQhq2qVUmhf6HyqSqHXcb2er0r9VJCIUgBJAK0N8vrtVuH_aq9Kcm_x2kiesUXW-PnmRm9CGECKYnnZJmSHCCBIstTCiBSAMpFun6DJi8fb9EESigTwenPA_QhhCUA8JKw9-iAFJQQXuYTNEz7dlDehb7DlRmfjOnwqhm9ioX-l1fD7w3-cmZ8q4JWHZ7iv8YHF2F2jFVX40h2ITYwnd7gwffWNX1rRh-txaPr8IOLdCwYjxcPcbXjI_TOqiaYj_v7EN2ff7-bzpL5zcXl9Ns80ZkAkZRW14xXpKwFoQUUqq60paygOjOaEJXXjChrqbBZnQHnOa9yQisuqrJSdWbZIfq86xuX-rMyYZStC9o0jepMvwpSAGVcsDKCxQ7Uvg_BGysH71rlN5KA3KYtl3IbqtyGKrdpy39py3VUP-1nrKrW1P_FfbwR-LoDnlxjNq9uLBe3d_ER9WSnuzCa9Yuu_KPMBRNc_ri-kDmfXc1O52fymj0Ddkyd8g</recordid><startdate>200802</startdate><enddate>200802</enddate><creator>Lee, H. K.</creator><creator>Seo, Y. K.</creator><creator>Baek, J. H.</creator><creator>Koh, J. S.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200802</creationdate><title>Comparison between ultrasonography (Dermascan C version 3) and transparency profilometry (Skin Visiometer SV600)</title><author>Lee, H. K. ; Seo, Y. K. ; Baek, J. H. ; Koh, J. S.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4707-9fcd35b19d712808adbcf2382c4ec11a6d31aff27f4d405565b612b57b9bad4f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>dermal intensity</topic><topic>dermal thickness</topic><topic>Dermis - anatomy & histology</topic><topic>Dermis - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Dermis - pathology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Silicone Gels</topic><topic>Skin - anatomy & histology</topic><topic>Skin - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Skin - pathology</topic><topic>Skin Aging - pathology</topic><topic>skin roughness</topic><topic>Ultrasonography - methods</topic><topic>wrinkle</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lee, H. K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seo, Y. K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baek, J. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koh, J. S.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Skin research and technology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lee, H. K.</au><au>Seo, Y. K.</au><au>Baek, J. H.</au><au>Koh, J. S.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison between ultrasonography (Dermascan C version 3) and transparency profilometry (Skin Visiometer SV600)</atitle><jtitle>Skin research and technology</jtitle><addtitle>Skin Res Technol</addtitle><date>2008-02</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>8</spage><epage>12</epage><pages>8-12</pages><issn>0909-752X</issn><eissn>1600-0846</eissn><abstract>Background/purpose: A recently developed method to estimate skin smoothness is the replica method, which may have the limitation of the roughness difference of actual skin due to the skin‐replicating process. Therefore, observation of dermal layer change is very important. For this purpose, ultrasonic display equipment is generally used. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the correlation between skin roughness and dermal density in wrinkle evaluation.
Methods: We evaluated the crow's feet of 95 Korean females using mechanical assessments; Skin‐Visiometer SV 600 and Dermascan C. Transparency profilometry (Skin Visiometer) use a very thin skin print, which allows parallel light to pass through and is analyzed immediately after production. High‐frequency (20 MHz) ultrasonography (Dermascan C) enables non‐invasive evaluation of skin thickness and echo density.
Results: We found a correlation between skin roughness and dermal density. Particularly, we found a significant correlation between skin roughness (R2) and dermal thickness. Also, we found a significant negative correlation between dermal density and dermal thickness (P<0.05).
Conclusion: Therefore, the ultrasonography system may be considered a very useful method in wrinkle evaluation with the transparency profilometry. However, further study will be required.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>18211596</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1600-0846.2007.00257.x</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| identifier | ISSN: 0909-752X |
| ispartof | Skin research and technology, 2008-02, Vol.14 (1), p.8-12 |
| issn | 0909-752X 1600-0846 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70235739 |
| source | Wiley Online Library Open Access |
| subjects | Adult dermal intensity dermal thickness Dermis - anatomy & histology Dermis - diagnostic imaging Dermis - pathology Female Humans Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods Middle Aged Silicone Gels Skin - anatomy & histology Skin - diagnostic imaging Skin - pathology Skin Aging - pathology skin roughness Ultrasonography - methods wrinkle |
| title | Comparison between ultrasonography (Dermascan C version 3) and transparency profilometry (Skin Visiometer SV600) |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T06%3A02%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_24P&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20between%20ultrasonography%20(Dermascan%20C%20version%203)%20and%20transparency%20profilometry%20(Skin%20Visiometer%20SV600)&rft.jtitle=Skin%20research%20and%20technology&rft.au=Lee,%20H.%20K.&rft.date=2008-02&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=8&rft.epage=12&rft.pages=8-12&rft.issn=0909-752X&rft.eissn=1600-0846&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1600-0846.2007.00257.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_24P%3E70235739%3C/proquest_24P%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=70235739&rft_id=info:pmid/18211596&rfr_iscdi=true |