Use of SkinFibrometer® to measure skin elasticity and its correlation with Cutometer® and DUB® Skinscanner. Issue 3 (6th February 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Kim, M. A.; Kim, E. J.; Lee, H. K.
• Is Part Of: Skin research and technology. Volume 24:Issue 3(2018)
• Page Start: 466
• Page End: 471
• Publication Date: 2018-02-06
• Subjects: aging -- non‐invasive -- skin firmness -- skin stiffness; Skin -- Research -- Periodicals; Skin -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Skin -- Physiology -- Periodicals; 616.5
• DOI: 10.1111/srt.12455
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0909-752X

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Skin elasticity is an important indicator of skin aging. The aim of this study was to demonstrate that the SkinFibrometer ® is appropriate for measuring skin biomechanical properties, and to correlate it with elasticity parameters measured using the Cutometer ® and with dermis structural properties measured using DUB ® Skinscanner. Materials and methods: Twenty‐one individuals participated in this study. The skin of the cheek, around the eye, and the volar forearm were evaluated. To analyze correlations of elasticity parameters, the induration value against the indenter pressure of SkinFibrometer ® and R, Q parameters of Cutometer ® were compared. Dermal echogenicity using DUB ® Skinscanner was compared with the induration value of SkinFibrometer ® . Results: The younger age group showed more firm and elastic skin properties compared to the older age group, and the elasticity values of the volar forearm were significantly higher than those of the cheek and around the eye region. Even though the measuring principle is different, both SkinFibrometer ® and Cutometer ® demonstrated the same trends of skin elasticity differences according to age and anatomical regions. There were significant correlations between the induration value of SkinFibrometer ®, representing skin firmness, and R0, Q0 and R2, R5, R7, Q1, Q2 of Cutometer ®, which represent skin firmness and resilience, respectively ( P < .01). In addition, dermal echogenicity positively correlated with skin firmness determined by SkinFibrometer ® ( P < .01). Conclusion: We identified correlations between skin elasticity parameters evaluated by two different methods of suction and indentation, and demonstrated that the SkinFibrometer ® is an objective, non‐invasive evaluation tool for skin stiffness and elasticity.