À essayer en premier
Eucerin Complete Repair Plus Lotion 10% Urea
Le choix homologué qui déclare 10 % d’urée, la concentration utilisée dans l’essai sur la sécheresse.
Le lissant le mieux étudié, en trois versions
Ce que cette page vous apporte: Quelle lotion à l’urée acheter pour une peau rugueuse et granuleuse, et ce que l’urée est vraiment démontrée faire.
À essayer en premier
Eucerin Complete Repair Plus Lotion 10% Urea
Le choix homologué qui déclare 10 % d’urée, la concentration utilisée dans l’essai sur la sécheresse.
Que faire ensuite
Le pot Udderly est bien moins cher mais se mesure en grammes : son prix ne peut pas être aligné sur celui des deux pompes.
Ce que cette page ne peut pas vous dire
Les bonnes données sur l’urée concernent la sécheresse. Pour les bosses de la kératose pilaire, notre recherche n’a trouvé aucun essai contre placebo.
Les prix sont une observation datée, pas une offre en cours.
Pot le moins cher · vendu au poids
$3.20 par 100 gurea 10% (per US packaging) · 227 g tub
Nous n’avons trouvé la liste d’ingrédients que dans un autre pays. Le flacon vendu ici peut différer · vérifié le 2026-08-23
Unscented per the published list; contains parabens. Strength stated on US packaging.
5 % d’urée · plus grande pompe
$4.39 par 100 mLurea 5% + lactate + ceramide · 500 mL pump
Nous avons cherché une liste d’ingrédients publiée pour ce flacon sans la trouver · vérifié le 2026-08-23
The Canadian sibling of the Roughness Relief lotion we used.
Vérification de la formule du fabricant ↗Source vérifiée de la formule ↗
10 % d’urée · homologué et déclaré
$9.43 par 100 mLurea 10% · 250 mL pump
Nous avons cherché une liste d’ingrédients publiée pour ce flacon sans la trouver · vérifié le 2026-08-23
The 10% option; Health Canada licence 80030672 is recorded under the Complete Repair name family, not this exact product name (checked Aug 20, 2026).
Vérification de la formule du fabricant ↗Source vérifiée de la formule ↗
Ce qui diffèreUrea strengths and how they are declared differ. The two Eucerin pumps can be compared per 100 mL; the Udderly tub is measured in g and is shown separately.
One question per row. The green check marks that row's better answer — there is no overall winner.
| Vérification | Udderly SmoothExtra Care 10% urea | EucerinComplete Repair · 5% urea | EucerinComplete Repair Plus · 10% |
|---|---|---|---|
| Urea strength10% is the strength with dryness-trial evidence; this row is about how it is declared | 10%stated on the brand's US packaging, not the Canadian listing | 5% urea + lactic acidbelow the studied strength | Meilleure réponse de cette ligne.10% — declareda Health Canada licence under the Complete Repair name family matches this strength |
| Fragrance-free?how well the claim can be checked | Meilleure réponse de cette ligne.Yes — verifiedunscented; no fragrance in the published list | Claimedstated on the listing | Claimedstated on the listing |
Tout ce qui précède en détail : les vérifications côte à côte, les résultats de chaque étude, les étiquettes et nos sources.
Les preuves détaillées ci-dessous sont rédigées en anglais.
Aperçu de la comparaison
Urea has the best trial evidence here, and it is for dryness: in one 4-week within-person trial a 10% urea lotion cut dryness scores by about 65%, more than a glycerol moisturizer. For the bumps of keratosis pilaris, the maintained ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed searches through Aug 20, 2026 identified no placebo-controlled urea trial. The $7.27 Udderly tub is measured in grams, while both Eucerin pumps are measured in millilitres, so its unit price is not ranked against theirs. The licensed, declared 10% pick is the Eucerin Plus. (The Eucerin we used, Roughness Relief, is a US product — these are its Canadian siblings.)
Ce qui correspond
All three are urea moisturizers sold as unscented or fragrance-free, for rough, dry, bumpy skin.
Ce qui diffère
Urea strengths and how they are declared differ. The two Eucerin pumps can be compared per 100 mL; the Udderly tub is measured in g and is shown separately.
Limite des preuves
Evidence on this page supports the ingredient, product type, or prevention step. It doesn't prove any one of these exact products is better.
The maintained ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed searches identified no study naming any of these three products. What follows is what was tested instead: a different cream from one brand, an unnamed 10% urea cream from the other, and the ingredient on its own.
~A different Udderly cream, six people, and the study stopped early
The maintained ClinicalTrials.gov search returned no study naming the 10% urea Extra Care cream. The one registry record naming the brand, NCT00667589 at Northwestern University, used plain Udderly Smooth Udder Cream — the version with no urea — as the plain-moisturiser group in a four-way comparison in hand-foot skin reaction caused by the cancer drug sorafenib. It was stopped after 6 people, so no group produced usable data.
Réserve : The cream that was tested contains no urea, so it says nothing about the 10% urea version reviewed here.
—Our search found no study of this exact product
The maintained ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed searches returned no record naming Complete Repair. At ingredient level, the closest match is a 40-person randomised study in people with type 2 diabetes and severe foot dryness. The cream tested was Ureadin Rx Db (ISDIN) — not a Eucerin product — combining 5% urea with arginine and carnosine, compared against a glycerol emollient for 28 days and scored by someone who did not know which cream was which: the dryness index fell from 1.6 to 0.2, against 1.0 for the comparison cream.
Réserve : A different brand's cream, with two extra actives, in people with diabetes — it supports 5% urea, not this bottle.
~A different Eucerin 10% urea cream was tested, not this one
The maintained ClinicalTrials.gov search returned no study naming this lotion. A Eucerin cream with 10% urea — the registry names no product code — was the treated group in the largest urea study in the maintained evidence set: 871 people with liver cancer taking sorafenib, randomized to the cream plus supportive care or supportive care alone (NCT01934829, published as Ren et al., Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2015). Hand-foot skin reaction of any grade occurred in 56.0% with the cream and 73.6% without.
Réserve : The comparison group received no cream at all, so the study cannot separate urea from any other moisturizer, and the problem being prevented was a chemotherapy side effect, not everyday rough skin.
NCT01934829 / Ren et al., Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2015 ↗Urea trial record →
Urea at 5% to 10% has real but small evidence: a handful of 30-to-50-person studies, mostly assessed by a blinded evaluator rather than fully blinded, mostly against another moisturizer rather than against nothing, and mostly testing urea mixed with other ingredients. When a 10% urea product was tested double-blind against 12% ammonium lactate in 70 people (Jennings et al., Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, 1998), the two could not be told apart — checked against ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed on 20 August 2026.
Dernière recherche :
For each evidence row, search the quoted evidence-row product name, then the quoted brand plus the distinctive product-name tokens. A brand-wide statement additionally requires a quoted brand-name search. Formula codes are added only when an official or study source discloses them.
Ce que cela ne vous dit pas : A negative maintained search is a dated coverage statement, not proof that no study exists in another database, language, registry, sponsor archive, unpublished report, or differently named formula.
Après les preuves
En tant que Partenaire Amazon, Skinlogie réalise un bénéfice sur les achats admissibles, sans coût supplémentaire pour vous. Les liens mènent aux fiches de produits exactes lorsqu’elles sont vérifiées.