International Journal of Trichology International Journal of Trichology
 Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
 
 
  Home | About IJT | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Online submission | Subscribe | Advertise | Contact us | Login   
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 9  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 54-57

Scanning electron microscopy and X-ray microanalysis of reconstructive hair fibers


1 Department of Dermatology, Hospital Clínic de, Barcelona, Spain
2 Scientific and Technological Centers, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

Correspondence Address:
Andrea Combalia
Department of Dermatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Barcelona
Spain
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijt.ijt_100_16

Rights and Permissions

Background: Reconstructive hair fibers are an innovative tool in cosmetic dermatology based on electrostatic adherent powder which bonds to the hair shaft and can disguise hair loss in men and women. Aim: This study aims to analyze and compare five different brands of organic hair fibers. Materials and Methods: A scanning electron microscope (SEM) was used to obtain amplified images of samples to study their shape and morphological structure. X-ray microanalysis was performed to study the chemical composition of reconstructive hair fibers. The five samples were tested in patients attending a trichology unit of a tertiary hospital. Results: The main component in hair fibers products 1 (Blum Secret™) and 3 (Keratin™) was cotton (cellulose of vegetal origin), while product 2 (Viviscal™) was made of a vegetal keratin. All three samples appeared as parallel-arranged fibres on the scanning electron microscope. The X-ray microanalysis showed an organic polymer mainly composed of C, O, and Si. Hair fibers 4 (Toppik™) and 5 (Nanogen™) were similar. Sample 4 derived from a keratin organic fiber and sample 5 from pure, positively charged keratin. In both cases, SEM revealed microfibers covered by a fine squamous. The X-ray microanalysis in both cases revealed a high presence of S. Conclusion: There was no discrepancy among the cosmetic results of the five samples, providing a successful esthetic effect in all of our patients despite the chemical differences found in the X-ray microanalysis.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed406    
    Printed8    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded11    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal