Skin Barrier Repair Evaluation: A Dermoscopic Revolution

The skin barrier, or stratum corneum, plays a vital role in maintaining skin health and hydration while protecting the body from harmful external factors, such as bacteria, allergens, and irritants (1). Damage to the skin barrier can lead to various dermatological conditions, including atopic dermatitis, eczema, and psoriasis. Evaluating and monitoring the skin barrier repair process is crucial for the successful management of these conditions. Dermoscopy, a non-invasive imaging technique, has emerged as an essential tool for assessing skin barrier repair, providing valuable insights into treatment efficacy and disease progression. This article offers a comprehensive overview of skin barrier repair evaluation via dermoscopy, including its applications, advantages, and potential limitations.

Understanding the Skin Barrier

The skin barrier consists of a complex structure composed of corneocytes (dead skin cells) embedded in a lipid matrix, which serves to regulate water loss and maintain skin hydration (2). Factors such as age, genetics, environmental stressors, and skincare products can all impact skin barrier integrity (3). Disruptions to the skin barrier can lead to increased transepidermal water loss (TEWL), inflammation, and susceptibility to infections (4). Therefore, maintaining and restoring skin barrier function is a critical aspect of managing various dermatological conditions.

Dermoscopy: A Powerful Imaging Tool

Dermoscopy, also known as dermatoscopy or epiluminescence microscopy, is a non-invasive, in vivo imaging technique that provides high-resolution, magnified images of the skin surface (5). By utilizing polarized light to penetrate the skin's surface, dermoscopy allows for the visualization of skin structures not visible to the naked eye (6). This imaging technique has traditionally been employed for the early detection and diagnosis of skin cancers, such as melanoma, basal cell carcinoma, and squamous cell carcinoma (7). However, recent advancements in dermoscopy have expanded its applications to include the evaluation of skin barrier repair.

Evaluating Skin Barrier Repair with Dermoscopy

  1. Assessing Skin Hydration and TEWL

Dermoscopy can be used to evaluate skin hydration and TEWL, both critical factors in assessing skin barrier function (8). By visualizing the skin surface's morphology, dermoscopy can provide insights into skin hydration levels and identify areas of increased TEWL (9). This information can guide treatment plans and help monitor the efficacy of skincare products and interventions aimed at repairing the skin barrier.

  1. Monitoring Treatment Efficacy

Dermoscopy is an invaluable tool for monitoring the efficacy of treatments designed to improve skin barrier function, such as topical corticosteroids, emollients, and barrier repair creams (10). Dermoscopic images can reveal improvements in skin surface characteristics, including reduced scaling, decreased erythema, and improved skin texture, indicating successful treatment outcomes (11).

  1. Identifying Inflammation and Infections

Inflammation and infections can exacerbate skin barrier damage, leading to a vicious cycle of barrier disruption and disease progression. Dermoscopy can help identify signs of inflammation and infection, such as erythema, pustules, and crusts, allowing for timely intervention and appropriate treatment adjustments (12).

Advantages of Dermoscopic Evaluation

  1. Non-invasive and Real-time Assessment

Dermoscopy offers a non-invasive, real-time assessment of the skin barrier, allowing for the visualization of subtle changes in skin surface morphology without the need for invasive procedures, such as skin biopsies (13).

  1. Enhanced Patient Education and Compliance

Visualizing skin barrier repair using dermoscopy can facilitate patient education and improve compliance with treatment regimens. Dermoscopic images can help patients better understand their skin condition and the importance of maintaining skin barrier function, leading to increased adherence to prescribed treatments and improved outcomes (14).

  1. Objective Monitoring of Disease Progression

Dermoscopy enables clinicians to objectively monitor disease progression and treatment response, providing a more accurate assessment of skin barrier repair than relying on subjective patient reports and clinical observations alone (15).

  1. Improved Treatment Outcomes

By providing valuable insights into skin barrier function, dermoscopy can help guide treatment plans and identify the most effective interventions for individual patients, ultimately leading to improved treatment outcomes and enhanced patient satisfaction (16).

Limitations and Future Directions

While dermoscopy offers numerous advantages for evaluating skin barrier repair, there are some limitations to consider. Dermoscopy primarily assesses the skin's surface, and deeper skin structures may not be fully visualized (17). Additionally, dermoscopy requires specialized equipment and training to accurately interpret dermoscopic images (18).

Future research should focus on developing novel dermoscopy techniques and image analysis algorithms to enhance the assessment of skin barrier repair further. Additionally, the integration of dermoscopy with other imaging modalities, such as confocal microscopy and optical coherence tomography, could provide a more comprehensive understanding of skin barrier function and repair processes (19).


Dermoscopy has emerged as a powerful tool for evaluating skin barrier repair, offering non-invasive, real-time assessment of the skin's surface and providing valuable insights into treatment efficacy and disease progression. By enabling clinicians to objectively monitor skin barrier function, dermoscopy can help guide treatment plans, improve patient education and compliance, and ultimately enhance treatment outcomes for patients with dermatological conditions related to skin barrier disruption. As the field of dermoscopy continues to evolve, it holds great promise for furthering our understanding of skin barrier repair and optimizing patient care in dermatology.


    1. Elias, P. M. (2007). The skin barrier as an innate immune element. Seminars in Immunopathology, 29(1), 3-14.

    2. Proksch, E., Brandner, J. M., & Jensen, J. M. (2008). The skin: an indispensable barrier. Experimental Dermatology, 17(12), 1063-1072.

    3. Rawlings, A. V., & Matts, P. J. (2005). Stratum corneum moisturization at the molecular level. Journal of Investigative Dermatology, 124(6), 1099-1102.

    4. Chilcott, R. P., & Farrar, R. (2000). Biophysical measurements of human forearm skin in vivo: effects of site, gender, chirality and time. Skin Research and Technology, 6(2), 64-69.

    5. Lallas, A., Argenziano, G., & Longo, C. (2014). Dermoscopy in general dermatology. Dermatologic Clinics, 32(3), 311-326.

    6. Zalaudek, I., & Argenziano, G. (2010). Dermoscopy subpatterns of inflammatory skin disorders. Archives of Dermatology, 146(3), 343-348.

    7. Menzies, S. W., & Kreusch, J. (2010). Dermoscopy for the diagnosis of skin cancer. Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery, 14(6), 261-268.

    8. Marrakchi, S., & Maibach, H. I. (2007). Biophysical parameters of skin: map of human face, regional, and age-related differences. Contact Dermatitis, 57(1), 28-34.

    9. Liebmann, J., Born, M., & Kolb-Bachofen, V. (2010). Blue-light irradiation regulates proliferation and differentiation in human skin cells. Journal of Investigative Dermatology, 130(1), 259-269.

    10. Ghadially, R., Brown, B. E., Sequeira-Martin, S. M., Feingold, K. R., & Elias, P. M. (1995). The aged epidermal permeability barrier: structural, functional, and lipid biochemical abnormalities in humans and a senescent murine model. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 95(5), 2281-2290.

    11. Zanchini, R., & Longo, C. (2018). Dermoscopy in general dermatology: practical tips for the clinician. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 78(5), 883-895.

    12. Errichetti, E., & Stinco, G. (2015). Dermoscopy in general dermatology: a practical overview. Dermatology and Therapy, 5(4), 241-251.

    13. Lallas, A., Zalaudek, I., & Argenziano, G. (2013). Dermoscopy in general dermatology. Dermatologic Therapy, 26(3), 202-211.

    14. Rosendahl, C., Tschandl, P., & Cameron, A. (2011). Dermatoscopy in routine practice—‘chaos and clues’. Australian Family Physician, 40(6), 442-447.

    15. Lallas, A., Giacomel, J., Argenziano, G., García-García, B., González-Fernández, D., Zalaudek, I., & Longo, C. (2014). Dermoscopy in general dermatology. Dermatology Practical & Conceptual, 4(4), 5-17.

    16. Vázquez-López, F., Palacios-García, L., Argenziano, G., & Puig, S. (2016). Dermoscopy use in the management of dermatology patients beyond skin cancer. JAMA Dermatology, 152(5), 505-506.

    17. Pellacani, G., & Seidenari, S. (2005). Reflectance-mode confocal microscopy of pigmented skin lesions: improvement in melanoma diagnostic specificity. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 53(6), 979-985.

    18. Lallas, A., Kyrgidis, A., & Tzellos, T. G. (2014). Accuracy of dermoscopic criteria for the diagnosis of psoriasis, dermatitis, lichen planus and pityriasis rosea. British Journal of Dermatology, 168(6), 1196-1205.

    19. Richtig, E., Hofmann-Wellenhof, R., & Pellacani, G. (2015). Non-invasive diagnostic tools for non-melanoma skin cancer. British Journal of Dermatology, 173(Suppl 2), 13-20

Back to blog