An Examination of the Phenol-Croton Oil Peel: Part I. Dissecting the Formula
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This article investigates which ingredients are the active ones in the most popular peel formula. The benefits of the “phenol” peel have been attributed to the effects of phenol on the dermis. Baker published a simple peel formula in 1962 that became a classic that has been used since by almost all plastic surgeons and dermatologists. Brown et al., in 1960, passed along a set of dogmas: (1) phenol is the active ingredient; (2) phenol peels more deeply in lower concentrations; and (3) adding a surface tension-lowering agent increases the peel. This article seeks to dissect the Baker formula by removing the croton oil. A patient was peeled serially with 18% phenol, 35% phenol, and 50% phenol solutions containing Septisol (surface tension-lowering agent) but no croton oil. This showed that increasing concentrations of phenol caused more clinical tissue reaction as evidenced by edema and erythema, but no significant dermal injury was seen. USP 88% phenol without Septisol did cause injury to the dermis. To test the effect of croton oil in the formula, the patient's face was peeled with two variations: the perioral area was peeled with 50% phenol to which croton oil was added to a strength of 2.1% and the remainder with 50% phenol without croton oil. The perioral area showed vesiculation, slough, and dermal exposure characteristic of a deep peel requiring 11 days to heal. The remainder of the face treated with 50% phenol without croton oil showed only edema and erythema without significant dermal injury. This experiment shows that the main postulates of Brown et al.—that phenol in lesser concentrations peels more than in higher concentrations and that phenol is the sole agent—are not true. In a fourth peel, a 0.7% concentration of croton oil in 50% phenol was applied to the parts of the face not peeled with croton oil in the third peel. The areas peeled with 50% phenol with 0.7% croton oil healed in 7 days, whereas the treatment with 50% phenol with 2.1% croton oil required 11 days. Deconstructing the Baker formula reveals fallacies in the four-decade-long belief system regarding these peels. The serial peels performed in this study show that increasing concentrations of phenol without croton oil cause increasing skin reaction but insignificant peeling effect. The addition of croton oil to 50% phenol, however, causes a marked increase in the depth of peeling into the dermis. Lowering the concentration of croton oil caused a lesser burn, as evidenced by fewer days to heal. The depth of the peel, therefore, seems to be more dependent on the concentration of croton oil than phenol. This will be further explored in Parts II, III, and IV. (Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 105: 227, 2000.)
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».