![]() For example, for skin phototype I, the minimal erythema dose for UVB is 20–40 mJ/cm 2, whereas that for UVA is 20–40 J/cm 2. It is known to be significantly more erythemogenic than UVA. UVB is the major portion of UVR that induces sunburns or UV-induced erythema. However, it is completely absorbed by the ozone and does not reach the earth’s surface. UVC is the shortest wavelength and considered the most damaging type of UVR. ![]() UVA is further categorized as UVA1 (340–400 nm) and UVA2 (320–340 nm). This review evaluates the utility of sunscreen in protecting against photoaging and further explores the requirements of an ideal sunscreen. Notable exceptions are pigmentary grade zinc oxide and titanium dioxide, which reflect VL however, the whitish discoloration they leave on the surface of the skin makes them cosmetically unappealing to consumers. However, there is a paucity of US FDA-approved filters that provide protection against long UVA (> 370 nm) and none against visible light (VL), making the ideal sunscreen a product that requires further innovation and research. In the USA, most broad-spectrum sunscreens provide protection against UVB radiation and short wavelength UVA radiation. It should be noted that proper photoprotection consists of seeking shade when outdoors wearing a wide-brimmed hat, photoprotective clothing, and sunglasses and applying sun protection factor (SPF) ≥ 30 broad-spectrum tinted sunscreen on exposed sites. Therefore, despite the emphasis of the market on the reversal of skin aging, the best defense against cutaneous age-related changes is through prevention with rigorous photoprotection. It has been reported that approximately 80% of skin aging on the face can be attributed to ultraviolet (UV) exposure. In today’s society, the value placed on a youthful appearance is reflected in the multibillion-dollar industry centered around anti-aging products. A recent observational study further characterized skin aging as hypertrophic and atrophic variants, with atrophic photoaging presenting with erythema and increased risk of skin cancers and hypertrophic photoaging with increased skin thickness and sallowness. Clinically, this is characterized by an increase in rhytides, telangiectasias, dyspigmentation including lentigines and ephelides, volume loss, and cutaneous malignancies. This literature review evaluates the utility of sunscreen in protecting against photoaging and further explores the requirements for an ideal sunscreen.Ĭhronic sun exposure has long been known to cause photoaging, a process where the skin undergoes changes in epidermal thickness, increases in pigment heterogeneity and dermal elastosis, degradation of collagen in the dermis, development of ectatic vessels, and increases in mutagenesis of keratinocytes and melanocytes in the skin. Additionally, various sunscreen additives such as antioxidants and photolyases have also been reported to protect against and possibly reverse signs of photoaging. Currently, there is a paucity of US FDA-approved filters that provide protection against long UVA (> 370 nm) and none against visible light. Evidence suggests that visible light and infrared light may play a role in photoaging and should be considered when choosing a sunscreen. In the USA, most broad-spectrum sunscreens provide protection against ultraviolet B (UVB) radiation and short-wavelength ultraviolet A (UVA) radiation. ![]() Over the years, evidence has also shown their efficacy in the prevention of photoaging, dyspigmentation, DNA damage, and photocarcinogenesis. Sunscreens have been on the market for many decades as a means of protection against ultraviolet-induced erythema.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |