Synopsis The irritant capacity of several anionic, amphoteric and non‐ionic surfactants has been studied by non‐invasive techniques, specifically by evaporimetry, laser Doppler flowmetry and one‐dimensional cutaneous ecography. Some of the surfactants most frequently used in shampoos and shower/foam gels were selected for testing. A series of aqueous solutions containing 5% of the active material in these products was patched onto normal skin; controls for comparison were set up with water and with sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS), a recognized irritant standard substance. It was deduced from the results obtained that, of the surfactants tested, the one showing the lowest irritant capacity is decyl polyglucoside, followed in increasing order of irritant capacity, by cocoamidopropyl betaine, magnesium laurylether sulphate and sodium laurylether sulphate. Résumé La capacitée irritante des beaucoups des tensioactives anioniques, anfoteric et no‐ioniques on étéétudiées avec métodes no invasives, particulierment avec évaporimetrie, laser DOPPLER et écografie cutanée unidimensionel. On á selectionné pour son texture quelques tensioactives utilisée plus frequement en shampooing et gel de bains ou douche. On á formulé une series des solutions ocuoses en contenent un 5% des matieres actives quón á emplâtre en peaux normaux, on áétablie des contrôles des comparations avec de l’eau et sodium lauryl sulphate (SLH) une substancie de reconnue irritabilitée. Des resultats obtenue on á deduit que tous les tensioactives quón á textés, celui qui á montré le meneur capacité irritant il fut decyl polyglucoside, suivi en ordre montante de capacité irritant por cocamidopropyl betaine, magnesium laureth sulphate et sodium laureth sulphate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vozmediano et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: