机构地区:[1]首都医科大学附属北京友谊医院皮肤性病科,100050 [2]山东省聊城市冠县人民医院皮肤性病科,252500 [3]天津市海河医院皮肤性病科,300350
出 处:《中华医学美学美容杂志》2020年第3期235-241,共7页Chinese Journal of Medical Aesthetics and Cosmetology
摘 要:目的观察口服小分子胶原蛋白肽,对面部皮肤年轻化的有效性及安全性。方法2018年11月至2019年2月,北京友谊医院皮肤科门诊纳入66名女性健康志愿者,年龄35~50(42.89±4.44)岁,随机分为试验组和对照组,每组各33名。试验组口服素颜新季胶原蛋白肽;对照组口服肽多健胶原蛋白粉,两组均为每天5 g,共12周。于口服前,服用后1、2、4、12周用VISIA皮肤检测仪采集图像及CK多功能皮肤测试仪采集数据,同时记录志愿者整体满意度及不良反应。结果61名志愿者完成本研究。口服胶原蛋白12周后,两组较口服前角质层含水量均有增加(65.41±10.60比59.82±9.26),经皮失水量、皱纹、纹理、毛孔、红色区、紫质均有减少(19.19±4.24比21.50±5.10;7.38±3.67比8.98±6.67;5.55±3.07比6.60±4.84;16.94±9.30比17.95±8.85;21.92±4.60比22.11±5.34;10.31±7.03比11.62±8.58),口服前后7项观察指标比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。试验组与对照组相比,角质层含水量差异有统计学意义(t=2.317,P=0.024),余6项指标组间差异虽无统计学意义,但试验组改善程度均优于对照组。斑点、紫外线色斑、棕色斑3项指标,两组口服前后比较,差异均无统计学意义。口服12周后试验组与对照组满意度分别为86.67%、61.29%,差异有统计学意义(χ^2=5.074,P=0.024)。两组不良反应发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论口服小分子胶原蛋白肽效果优于胶原蛋白粉,可改善皮肤纹理,保湿,志愿者满意度高,是面部年轻化的手段之一。Objective To observe the efficacy and safety of oral administration of low-molecular-weight collagen peptide on facial skin rejuvenation.Methods A total of 66 female volunteers in Department of Dermatology,Beijing Friendship Hospital,Capital Medical University aged from 35 to 50 years old(average 42.89±4.44)from November 2018 to February 2019 were enrolled and randomly divided into two groups,33 cases each.The testing group was given 5 g Su Yan Xin Ji collagen peptide for 12 weeks;the control group was given 5 g Tai Duo Jian collagen protein powder for 12 weeks.The effects were evaluated and analyzed using VISIA and CK complexion analysis system before and after 1,2,4,12 weeks of oral administration collagen;meanwhile,the volunteers'overall satisfaction and adverse reactions were also recorded.Results In total,61 volunteers completed the study.After 12 weeks of oral administration,the skin hydration of testing group and control group were all increased(65.41±10.60 vs 59.82±9.26),the transepidermal water loss,wrinkles,textures,pores,red areas and porphyrin were all decreased(19.19±4.24 vs.21.50±5.10;7.38±3.67 vs.8.98±6.67;5.55±3.07 vs.6.60±4.84;16.94±9.30 vs.17.95±8.85;21.92±4.60 vs.22.11±5.34;10.31±7.03 vs.11.62±8.58).There were statistically significant differences between the 7 parameters before and after oral administration(P<0.05).The difference of skin hydration between the testing and control group was statistically significant(t=2.317,P=0.024).Although there was no statistical difference among the other six parameters,the improvement degree of the testing group was better than that of the control group.Surface spots,UV spots and brown spots of two groups showed no significant difference before and after treatment.Overall satisfaction of the testing group and the control group were 86.67%vs.61.29%with significant difference 12 weeks after treatment(χ^2=5.074,P=0.024),while there were no significant differences in incidence of adverse reactions between two groups(P>0.05).Conclusions Oral admi
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...