192 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14641117)
1. Assessment of irritant skin reactions using electrical impedance--a comparison between 2 laboratories.
Kuzmina N; Duval C; Johnsson S; Boman A; Lindberg M; Emtestam L
Contact Dermatitis; 2003 Jul; 49(1):26-31. PubMed ID: 14641117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Electrical impedance as a potential tool to distinguish between allergic and irritant contact dermatitis.
Nyrén M; Kuzmina N; Emtestam L
J Am Acad Dermatol; 2003 Mar; 48(3):394-400. PubMed ID: 12637919
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Clinical morphology of sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) and nonanoic acid (NAA) irritant patch test reactions at 48 h and 96 h in 152 subjects.
Reiche L; Willis C; Wilkinson J; Shaw S; de Lacharrière O
Contact Dermatitis; 1998 Nov; 39(5):240-3. PubMed ID: 9840260
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Intra-individual variation of irritant threshold and relationship to transepidermal water loss measurement of skin irritation.
Smith HR; Rowson M; Basketter DA; McFadden JP
Contact Dermatitis; 2004 Jul; 51(1):26-9. PubMed ID: 15291829
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Different pathways in irritant contact eczema? Early differences in the epidermal elemental content and expression of cytokines after application of 2 different irritants.
Grängsjö A; Leijon-Kuligowski A; Törmä H; Roomans GM; Lindberg M
Contact Dermatitis; 1996 Dec; 35(6):355-60. PubMed ID: 9118630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Study of cumulative irritant contact dermatitis in man utilizing open application on subclinically irritated skin.
Lee CH; Maibach HI
Contact Dermatitis; 1994 May; 30(5):271-5. PubMed ID: 8088139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Surfactant-induced skin irritation and skin repair: evaluation of a cumulative human irritation model by noninvasive techniques.
Wilhelm KP; Freitag G; Wolff HH
J Am Acad Dermatol; 1994 Dec; 31(6):981-7. PubMed ID: 7962781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Skin irritability to sodium lauryl sulfate is associated with increased positive patch test reactions.
Schwitulla J; Brasch J; Löffler H; Schnuch A; Geier J; Uter W
Br J Dermatol; 2014 Jul; 171(1):115-23. PubMed ID: 24593017
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Assessment of acute skin irritation in rabbits using electrical impedance model.
Ferreira DM; Silva CS; Souza MN
Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2006; 2006():1665-8. PubMed ID: 17945658
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The effect of damaged skin barrier induced by subclinical irritation on the sequential irritant contact dermatitis.
Yan-yu W; Xue-min W; Yi-Mei T; Ying C; Na L
Cutan Ocul Toxicol; 2011 Dec; 30(4):263-71. PubMed ID: 21774626
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Experimental irritant contact dermatitis due to cumulative epicutaneous exposure to sodium lauryl sulphate and toluene: single and concurrent application.
Wigger-Alberti W; Krebs A; Elsner P
Br J Dermatol; 2000 Sep; 143(3):551-6. PubMed ID: 10971328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The tandem repeated irritation test: a new method to assess prevention of irritant combination damage to the skin.
Wigger-Alberti W; Spoo J; Schliemann-Willers S; Klotz A; Elsner P
Acta Derm Venereol; 2002; 82(2):94-7. PubMed ID: 12125960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Skin irritation typing and grading based on laser Doppler perfusion imaging.
Fullerton A; Rode B; Serup J
Skin Res Technol; 2002 Feb; 8(1):23-31. PubMed ID: 12005117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Applicability of an exaggerated forearm wash test for efficacy testing of two corticosteroids, tacrolimus and glycerol, in topical formulations against skin irritation induced by two different irritants.
Clemmensen A; Andersen F; Petersen TK; Hagberg O; Andersen KE
Skin Res Technol; 2011 Feb; 17(1):56-62. PubMed ID: 20923463
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Artificial disruption of skin barrier prior to irritant patch testing does not improve test design.
Gebhard KL; Effendy I; Löffler H
Br J Dermatol; 2004 Jan; 150(1):82-9. PubMed ID: 14746620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Fruit acids and sodium hydroxide in the food industry and their combined effect with sodium lauryl sulphate: controlled in vivo tandem irritation study.
Fluhr JW; Bankova L; Fuchs S; Kelterer D; Schliemann-Willers S; Norgauer J; Kleesz P; Grieshaber R; Elsner P
Br J Dermatol; 2004 Nov; 151(5):1039-48. PubMed ID: 15541082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The MOAHLFA index of irritant sodium lauryl sulfate reactions: first results of a multicentre study on routine sodium lauryl sulfate patch testing.
Uter W; Geier J; Becker D; Brasch J; Löffler H
Contact Dermatitis; 2004; 51(5-6):259-62. PubMed ID: 15606650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Skin reactions to irritants assessed by non-invasive bioengineering methods.
Agner T; Serup J
Contact Dermatitis; 1989 May; 20(5):352-9. PubMed ID: 2670419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Skin irritation in man: a comparative bioengineering study using improved reflectance spectroscopy.
Andersen PH; Maibach HI
Contact Dermatitis; 1995 Nov; 33(5):315-22. PubMed ID: 8565486
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Crescendo reactions to sodium lauryl sulfate and retinoic acid in irritant patch tests.
Löffler H; Effendy I
Contact Dermatitis; 1997 Jul; 37(1):47-8. PubMed ID: 9255498
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
