Irritation surfactant-induced

Wilhelm, K.P., Cua, A.B., Wolff, H.H., and Maibach, H.I. (1993) Surfactant-induced stratum corneum hydration in vivo prediction of the irritation potential of anionic surfactants. J. Invest. Dermatol. 101 310-315. 

Loden, M., Barany, E., Mandahl, P., and Wessman, C., The influence of urea-treatment on skin susceptibility to surfactant-induced irritation. A placebo-controlled and randomized study, Exogenous Dermatol., 1, 3, 2004. 

Blankschtein et al. have concluded that micelle size is a major factor in surfactant induced irritation.37 As the micelle size increases, penetration of the surfactant into deeper layers decreases and therefore increasing the micelle size is an approach to enhancing mildness. In principle, factors that reduce the micelle charge will increase the micelle size and therefore have the potential to reduce swelling and penetration under cleansing conditions. Note, however, that the inherent tendency of the molecule to cause an irritation response may be related to the charge density of the molecule rather than the micelle size. 

C5a is chemotacdc, recruiting neutrophils and macrophages to the site of injury [174]. Here, it stimulates the release of lysosomal enzymes, leukotrienes, and reactive oxygen species by maorophages. Currently, little is known about the involvement of the peptide mediators in surfactant-induced irritation. 

Although no clinical irritation could be observed, most surfactants induce significant changes at the surface of the stratum corneum. It can be assumed that this test is evaluating some very early steps of skin irritation when the surfactant starts to interact with the upper skin surface layers. Other procedures to analyze D-squame strippings have been reviewed in the literature [79]. 

The numerous factors affecting the cutaneous irritation level induced by a product/ surfactant can be subdivided into factors linked to the subjects (test volunteers, consumers. 

Finally, methods of evaluation of surfactant-induced skin irritation are subdivided in those involving visual evaluations of skin alterations and instmmental assessments of skin... 

KP Wilhelm, HH Wolff. Comparison of various qualities of surfactant-induced skin irritation erythema, transepidermal water loss, and skin dryness. Congress of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis, Bmssels, 1992, p 90. 

Solubility/miscibility Generally very soluble or miscible in water. Soluble in ethanol, com oil, and olive oil. Insoluble in mineral oil Biological considerations Surfactant. May cause micelle formation, with incumbent effects on bioavailability if included at concentrations of 1% or higher. May be associated with irritation if given intravenously or intramuscularly. Dogs have the peculiarity that Tweens injected parenterally induce the spontaneous systemic release of histamine. This response is particularly striking with IV injection, and therefore Tweens should not be used as components of IV vehicles in dogs... 

Muir, C.K. (1985). Opacity of bovine cornea in vitro induced by surfactants and industrial chemicals compared with ocular irritancy in vivo. Toxicol. Lett. 24 157-162. 

Furrer, P., et al. 2000. Application of in vivo confocal microscopy to the objective evaluation of ocular irritation induced by surfactants. Int J Pharm 207 89. 

The effect of a surfactant on skin depends on the type of surfactant as described earlier. Wilhelm et al. demonstrated the irritation potential of anionic surfactants.21 They evaluated the effects of sodium salts of n-alkyl sulfates with variable carbon chain length on TEWL and found that a C12 analog gave a maximum response. They suggested that the mechanisms responsible for the hydration of SC are related to the irritation properties of the surfactants. Leveque et al. also suggested22 that the hyperhydration of SC is consecutive to the inflammation process. They demonstrated that the increase of TEWL was induced by SDS without removal of SC lipids. SDS might influence not only SC barrier function, but also the nucleated layer of epidermis and dermal system associated with inflammation.23 Recently, no correlation was found between the level of epidermal hyperplasia and TEWL increase on the SDS-irritated skin.23 Further work would be needed to determine the effects of surfactants on skin. 

Barrier breakdown leading to an inflammatory response due to diffusion of surfactant into epidermis Alkaline pH induced protein swelling increasing surfactant irritation potential... 

SC resistivity in Table 10.1 is quoted from Yamamoto and Yamamoto (1976). The resistivity is higher the lower the water content of the SC. This is also the case with many (dead) protein powders (Takashima and Schwan 1965 Smith and Foster 1985). The water content of SC is dependent on the relative humidity of the air in contact with the SC surface. Methods for diagnosis of, for example, cancer tissue by information extraction from impedance dispersions in skin and oral mucosa have been found (OUmar 1998), or correlation of impedance response patterns to histological findings in irritant skin reactions induced by various surfactants (Nicander et al. 1996). 

Nicander I, Ollmar S, Eek A, Lundh RozeU B, Emtestam L. 1996. Correlation of impedance response patterns to histological findings in irritant skin reactions induced by various surfactants. Br J Dermatol 134,221-228. 

A. Di Nardo, K. Sugino. P. Wertz, J. Ademola, H, I. Maibach. Sodium laury 1. surfaie induced irritant contact dermatitis a correlation study between ceramides an in vivo parameters of irritation. Contact Derm. 35(2) 86-91. 1996 Kiisiner W, Ltrcal tolerance mucous membranes and skin, in Anionic Surfactants Bittchcmisiry, Toxicology. Dermatology, Surfactants Science Scries. Vol. 10. New York. Manrel Dekker. 1980, pp. 137-307. 

The polymer-induced micellization leads to a lowering of the surfactant unimer concentration and activity. This can be significant for the elimination of skin irritation caused by the surfactant. 

---