Nitric Oxide and Skin: Separating the Chemistry from the Hype

Nitric oxide (NO) has been recognized for decades as an important biological signaling molecule, including its role in vascular function and skin physiology. In dermatology, NO is interesting because it participates in microcirculation, inflammation, immune signaling, wound healing, and other skin-relevant processes. That makes it a credible target for skincare and wound-care innovation, but it also creates a formulation challenge: the biology is real, yet delivery is hard.

The actual problem

NO is highly reactive and short-lived in its free gaseous form. Delivering it in a stable topical product is not the same as adding a standard ingredient to a cream. If a product claims to provide nitric oxide to skin, three questions matter: what chemical form stores the NO, what triggers its release, and is there measurable data showing the chemistry is doing what the label says. Without clear answers to those questions, "nitric oxide" can easily become a marketing phrase rather than a real delivery system.

Our approach

We use non-thermal gliding arc plasma to treat N-acetylcysteine (NAC), a thiol-containing compound. The goal is chemistry consistent with S-nitrosothiol (RSNO) formation, which stores NO in a more stable, covalently bound form than free gaseous NO.

We think of the release as happening in two phases: an early, more readily available pool, and a more stable depot fraction that releases under mechanical disturbance, such as the friction of applying the product to skin.

What we've measured

This is development-stage work, not a finished clinical product, so we're describing it conservatively and sticking to what's actually been measured:

• NO release of approximately 44 ppm at Day 22, measured via an FD-90A electrochemical sensor.

• Spectral features consistent with nitrosothiol formation, confirmed by UV-Vis at the characteristic 545 nm peak.

• No detectable accumulation of free nitrite or nitrate on colorimetric test strips, meaning the nitrogen is staying bound rather than sitting around as a reactive byproduct.

Ongoing work is focused on penetration behavior, formulation stability, and biological response, including planned in vitro studies on transdermal penetration.

Why the plasma type matters

Not every plasma system used in skincare is doing the same chemistry. Some topical plasma approaches lean toward oxidizing species like ozone, a strong oxidizer that drives oxidative stress when applied to skin. An NO-centered system like ours is tuned around a different chemical profile and a different biological objective. Oxidative stress and nitric oxide signaling are not interchangeable, and for skin applications, that difference matters in practice, not just on paper.

The broader context

Reviews of NO in skin describe roles in barrier function, microvasculature, inflammation, melanogenesis, and wound repair. That doesn't mean every NO-based product works as advertised. It does mean the molecule is biologically relevant enough to justify serious formulation science rather than a surface-level marketing claim.

Where this leaves us

Our goal is to keep the chemistry and the marketing separate. For any topical NO platform, the questions stay the same: what is the storage form, what releases it, and what data backs the claim. Until those are answered clearly, the science isn't finished, and we'd rather say that plainly than promise more than the data supports.