RESUMO
A reduction in lung volume is used to diagnose physiologic restriction in the pulmonary function tests of patients with lung disease. Airflow obstruction is commonly associated with hyperinflation of static lung volume. Because restriction and obstruction exert opposite effects on lung volumes, we questioned whether the lack of hyperinflation of static lung volumes could indicate the presence of concomitant restriction in patients with airflow obstructive ventilatory defects. To assess this, we evaluated by pulmonary function tests and chest roentgenograms of 58 patients with airflow obstruction (group 1), 18 of whom then sustained various types of resection for lung cancer (group 2) as a type of superimposed restriction. We selected 80 percent of predicted as the lower limit of "normal" frequently used by clinical pulmonary function laboratories. Despite a statistically significant decrease in total lung capacity (p less than 0.05) for the postpneumonectomy patients, when the static lung volume measurements of the patients with resection were evaluated, no one lung volume showed a consistent reduction sufficient to detect the superimposed restriction in all these patients. Using 80 percent of predicted as "normal," 61 percent of our patients with airflow obstruction and superimposed restriction would have been missed. We conclude that it is clinically difficult, based on only static lung volume measurements alone, to detect restriction superimposed on the hyperinflation of airflow obstruction unless these lung volumes are reduced to below accepted "normal" limits.
