Histamine and substance P elicited itch to the same degree in normal skin and inflamed skin pretreated with SLS despite a stronger weal response in inflamed skin. Mediators present in inflamed skin did not potentiate itch, a c-fibre-mediated neuronal response. The weal reaction is based on enhanced vascular permeability (protein extravasation). A greater skin perfusion in inflamed skin may therefore have increased the weal size. We propose an experimental model in humans for testing of itch involving both normal and inflamed skin. The model has the potential for use in evaluating new topical and systemic treatments of itch.

The changes in MR-determined synovial membrane volume, early synovial enhancement, and cartilage and bone erosions after osmic acid knee synovectomy were studied. Gadolinium-DTPA enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of 18 knees with persistent arthritis was performed before and 1 month after treatment. The synovial membrane volume was significantly reduced (median -52%) in all 9 patients brought into clinical remission (p < 0.01), while no significant change was found in patients with clinical relapse. The early synovial enhancement was not significantly changed. MRI revealed progressive erosive changes in 2 patients. The time of relapse was correlated to a MR-erosion score, but not to early synovial enhancement or volumes of synovium or effusion (Spearman tests). MRI-determined synovial membrane volumes and early synovial enhancement may be objective quantitative markers of inflammation. MR-scores of cartilage and bone erosions are sensitive to progressive changes occurring within a month.

Background Alcohol‐based hand rub (ABHR) is widely used for hand disinfection in the health care sector. ABHR is, however, known to cause discomfort when applied on damaged skin emphasizing the unmet need for alternative and better tolerated types of disinfectants. Active chlorine hand disinfectants (ACHDs) are potential new candidates; however, the effect on the skin barrier function compared to ABHR remains to be assessed. Materials and methods In Study A, the forearm skin of healthy adults was repeatedly exposed to ACHD and ABHR. Skin barrier function was assessed by measurement of transepidermal water loss, electrical conductance, pH, and erythema at baseline and at follow‐up after 2 days, and subjective discomfort was likewise assessed. Study B was performed in the same way; however, in order to induce an experimental irritant contact dermatitis, sodium lauryl sulfate patch tests were applied to forearms before exposure to ACHD and ABHR. Results In both studies, the skin barrier function was unaffected after repetitive exposure to ACHD and ABHR, and with no significant differences between the products. Subjective discomfort was reported as sporadic or very mild in relation to both products. Conclusion Our results illustrate that use of ACHD does not affect the skin barrier function negatively, neither in intact skin nor in skin with experimentally induced contact dermatitis. Future studies should include real‐life evaluation of skin barrier function and subjective discomfort following ACHD use in individuals with and without hand eczema.