Controversies regarding the sensitive skin syndrome

References

• Frosch PJ, Kligman AM. A method of appraising the stinging capacity of topically applied substances. J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem.28, 197–209 (1977).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willis CM, Shaw S, DeLacharriere O et al. Sensitive skin: an epidemiological study. Br. J. Dermatol.145, 258–263 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Misery L, Myon E, Martin N, Verriere F, Nocera T, Taieb C. Sensitive skin in France: an epidemiological approach. Ann. Dermatol. Venereol.132, 425–429 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jourdain R, de Lacharriere O, Bastien P, Maibach HI. Ethnic variations in self-percieved sensitive skin: epidemiological survey. Contact Dermatitis45, 162–169 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Misery L, Myon E, Martin N et al. Sensitive skin: psychological effects and seasonal changes. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol.21, 620–628 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sensitive Skin Syndrome. Berardesca E, Fluhr JW, Maibach HI (Eds). Taylor & Francis, NY, USA (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Kligman AM, Sadiq I, Zhen Y, Crosby M. Experimental studies on the nature of sensitive skin. Skin Res. Technol.12, 217–222 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morizot F, Guinot C, Lopez J, LaFus I, Tschachler E. Sensitive skin: analysis of symptoms, perceived causes and possible mechanisms. Cosmet. Toiletries115, 83–89 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Chew A, Maibach HI. Sensitive skin. In: Dry Skin and Moisturizers. Lodén M, Maibach HI (Eds). CRC Press. NY, USA, 429–440 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Löffler H, Aramaki J, Effendi I, Maibach HI. Sensitive skin. In: Dermatotoxicology. CRC Press, NY, USA, 123–136 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Mills OH, Berger RS. Defining the susceptibility of acne-prone and sensitive skin populations to extrinsic factors. Dermatol. Clin.1, 93–98 (1991).
   Google Scholar
• Yokota T, Matsumoto M, Sakamaki T et al. Classification of sensitive skin and development of a treatment system appropriate for each group. IFSCC Magazine6, 303–307 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Pons-Guiraud A. Sensitive skin: a complex and multifactorial syndrome. J. Cosmet. Dermatol.3, 145–148 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Aramaki J, Kawana S, Effendy I, Happle R, Loffler H. Differences of skin irritation between Japanese and European women. Br. J. Dermatol.146, 1052–1056 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seidenari S, Francomano M, Mantovani L. Baseline biophysical parameters in subjects with sensitive skin. Contact Dermatitis.38, 311–315 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berardesca E, Maibach HI. Racial differences in skin pathophysiology. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol.34, 667–672 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yosipovitch G, Maibach HI. Thermal sensory analyzer. Boon to the study of C and Aδ fibers. Curr. Probl. Dermatol.26, 84–89 (1998).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yokota T. Classification of sensitive skin with analysis of skin physiological parameter. J. Jap. Cosmet. Sci. Soc.29, 44–48 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Jourdain R, Bastien P, de Lacharriere O, Rubinstenn G. Detection thresholds of capsaicin: a new test to assess facial skin neurosensitivity. J. Cosmet. Sci.56, 153–166 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farage MA, Katsarou A, Maibach HI. Sensory, clinical and physiological factors in sensitive skin: a review. Contact Dermatitis55, 1–14 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwindt DA, Wilhelm KP, Miller DL, Maibach HI. Cumulative irritation in older and younger skin: a comparison. Acta Derm. Venereol.78, 279–283 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cua AB, Wilhelm KP, Maibach HI. Cutaneous SLS irritation potential: age and regional variability. Br. J. Dermatol.123, 607 (1990).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Besne I, Descombes C, Breton L. Effect of age anatomical site on density of sensory innervation in human epidermis. Arch. Dermatol.138, 1445–1450 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nilzen A, Voss-Lagerlund K. Epicutaneous tests with detergents and a number of other common allergens. Dermatologica124, 42–52 (1962).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Makri A, Goveia M, Balbus J, Parkin R. Children’s susceptibility to chemicals: a review by developmental stage. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health B Crit. Rev.7, 417–435 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reilly DM, Ferdinando D, Johnston C, Shaw C, Buchanan KD, Green MR. The epidermal nerve fibre network: characterization of nerve fibers in human skin by confocal microsvopy and assessment of racial variations. Br. J. Dermatol.137, 163–170 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farage MA. Vulvar susceptibility to contact irritants and allergens: a review. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet.272, 167–172 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Loffler H, Dickel H, Kuss O, Diepgen TL, Effendy I. Characteristics of self-estimated enhanced skin susceptibility. Acta Derm. Venereol.81, 343–346 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson MK. Population differences in acute skin irritation responses. Race, sex, age, sensitive skin and repeat subject comparisons. Contact Dermatitis.46, 86–93 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lonne-Rahm S, Berg M, Marin P, Nordling K. Atopic dermatitis, stinging and effects of chronic stress: a pathocausal study. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol.51, 899–905 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Effendy I, Loeffler H, Maibach HI. Baseline transepidermal water loss in patients with acute and healed irritant Contact Dermatitis.33, 371–374 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kallunki H, Kangas J, Laitinen S, Mäkinen M, Ojanen K, Susitaival P. Exposure to and Health Effects of Chemical and Biological Agents in Mechanical Wood Harvesting. Kuopio: Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Loffler H, Effendi I. Skin susceptibility of atopic individuals. Contact Dermatitis40, 239–242 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berardesca E, de Rigal J, Leveque JL, Maibach HI. In vivo biophysical characterization of skin physiological differences in races. Dermatologica182, 89–93 (1991).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Basketter DA, Wilhelm KP. Studies on non-immune contact reactions in an unselected population. Contact Dermatitis35, 237–240 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee CH, Maibach HI. The SLS model: an overview. Contact Dermatitis33, 1–7 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marriot M, Whittle E, Basketter DA. Facial variations in sensory response. Contact Dermatitis49, 227–231 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basketter DA, Griffiths HA. A study of the relationship between susceptibility to skin stinging and skin irritation. Contact Dermatitis29, 185–188 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green BG. Measurement of sensory irritation of the skin. Am. J. Contact Derm.11, 170–180 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Farage MA. Are we reaching the limits or our ability to detect skin effects with our current testing and measuring methods for consumer products? Contact Dermatitis52, 297–303 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paye M, Dalimier C, Catiaux Y, Chabassol C. Consumer perception of sensitive hands: what is behind it? Skin Res. Technol.5, 28–32 (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Draelos ZD. Sensitive skin: perceptions, evaluation and treatment. Am. J. Contact Derm.8, 67–78 (1997).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fox C. Technically speaking. Cosmet. Toiletries116, 42 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Katiyar SK, Ahmad N, Mukhtar H. Green tea and skin. Arch. Dermatol.139, 989–994 (2000).
   Google Scholar