Fig 6 - uploaded by Jean-Marie Botto
Content may be subject to copyright.
Context in source publication
Similar publications
Citations
... presence of conditions such as atopic dermatitis and psoriasis. 6 Methods to measure morphological parameters include ultrasonography, [7][8][9][10][11] surface microscopy, 4,[12][13][14][15][16][17][18] optical devices (such as Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT), [19][20] Visioscan and PRIMOS, 2,21-26 contact profilometers 1,5,[27][28][29][30][31][32] and other methods such as rubber replicas of the skin, micrometer. [33][34] Skin roughness is used to detect conditions such as actinic keratosis, verrucae and skin cancers, and also to determine responses to topical treatments. ...
Background:
Changes in body posture cause changes in morphological properties at different skin sites. Although previous studies have reported the thickness of the skin, the details of the postures are not generally given. This paper presents the effect of a change in posture on parameters such as thickness and surface roughness in 21 load-bearing and non-load-bearing sites.
Materials and methods:
A total of 12 volunteers (8 males and 4 females) were selected in an age group of 18-35 years and of Fitzpatrick skin type I-III. Images were captured using a clinically-approved VivoSight® optical coherence tomography system and analysed using an algorithm provided by Michelson Diagnostics.
Results:
Overextension (extending joints to full capacity) resulted in changes to thickness, roughness and undulation of the skin around the body.
Discussion and conclusion:
The load-bearing regions have thicker skin compared to non-load-bearing sites. This is the first time that undulation topography of the stratum corneum-stratum lucidum and the dermal-epidermal junction layers have been measured and reported using statistical values such as Ra. The data presented could help to define new skin layer models and to determine the variability of the skin around the body and between participants.
... With age, both the rete pegs and the dermal papillae progressively disappear [83,84]. The dermal papillae flatten, decrease in number, and become wider [27,[85][86][87][88][89]. The junction between dermis and epidermis becomes flatter with age and the thickness of the dermis decreases markedly, while that of the epidermis remains essentially unchanged [84,[90][91][92][93][94][95]. ...
Since this file is too large to be sent via ResearchGate, please make reprint requests to klmonson@fbi.gov.
This study addresses the permanence and persistence of friction ridges and the persistence of impressions made from these friction ridges over months and years. Permanence is the unchanging presence and appearance of friction ridge arrangements and their attributes between recurring observations of the skin. Permanence was evaluated from direct photographs of fingers collected over a period of 30 to 45 days (covering one or more skin regeneration cycles) as well as after 8 or more years had elapsed. Persistence embodies the operational concept of whether or not a pair of images displays sufficient similarity upon which to base an informed decision that they were made by the same finger, while acknowledging certain dissimilarities or distortions due to friction ridge physiology, image capture, matrix, substrate, and applied pressure. Persistence applies to both friction ridge skin and impressions made from these friction ridges. Permanence and persistence of skin were assessed from direct photographs of fingers taken two months apart and from finger photographs separated by an interval of at least 8 years. Permanence and persistence were also assessed from impressions taken over 4 months, as well as those separated by 8 to 53 years. Variability due to capture method was assessed by using four image capture methods over a four month period: direct photography of fingers, impressions captured by ink, holographic imaging, and live scan. Qualified latent fingerprint examiners assessed all changes observed over time, as well as any limitations imposed by capture method.
The practice of comparison and identification of fingerprint impressions was upheld, as was the prevailing use of the word persistence to describe stability of friction ridges. All photographs and impressions of the same finger were identifiable as originating from the same source. Within all the periods of observation, level 1 detail was permanent and persistent. Persistence, but not permanence, was supported for level 2 detail. Notably, the small changes observed were only in appearance; there were no changes in the presence of new, or absence of existing, minutiae. Level 3 details of ridge edge shape and pore presence were neither permanent nor persistent. Ridge width was permanent and persistent. Incipient ridges were neither permanent nor persistent.
