Zejda J
Pneumonol Pol. 1989 May;57(5):287-92.
In 30 males of a mean age 45.6 years suspected of asbestosis the author compared maximal oxygen consumption symptom limited, ventilation during consumption of oxygen (1 L per min) VE1.0 pulse rate on this level (HR1.0) and respiratory volume during ventilation 30 L X min.-1 (VT30) registered during exercise tests with an increasing load of 30 W every 3 minutes (group A) and 15 W every 1 minute (group B). Although both tests were judged to be equally stsrenuous the B test was shorter by one third and produced significantly higher VO2SL 1.89 L X min.-1, A: 1.71 L X min.-1 (p 0.01). Important diagnostical tests evaluating respiratory VE1.0, VT30 and circulatory (HR30) cost did not differ between groups. The author corroborated earlier studies that VE1.0 is one of the most sensitive tests of unequal ventilation and/or diffusion disorders in patients with slightly abnormal respiratory parameters: VC = 83% pred. FEV = 84% pred., FEV1% = 71%, DLCO = 82% pred. The results of this study show that test B is better than test A, being mich better tolerated.
在30名平均年龄为45.6岁、疑似患有石棉沉着病的男性中，作者比较了症状受限的最大耗氧量、吸氧期间的通气量（每分钟1升）（VE1.0）、该水平下的心率（HR1.0）以及运动试验期间通气量为30升/分钟时的呼吸量（VT30）。运动试验中每3分钟负荷增加30瓦（A组）和每1分钟负荷增加15瓦（B组）。尽管两项试验被判定为同样费力，但B组试验时间短三分之一，且产生的最大耗氧量显著更高，B组为1.89升/分钟，A组为1.71升/分钟（p<0.01）。评估呼吸（VE1.0）、循环（HR30）和VT30成本的重要诊断性试验在两组之间没有差异。作者证实了早期的研究，即对于呼吸参数略有异常（肺活量=预计值的83%、第一秒用力呼气量=预计值的84%、第一秒用力呼气量百分比=71%、一氧化碳弥散量=预计值的82%）的患者，VE1.0是评估通气不均和/或弥散障碍最敏感的试验之一。这项研究的结果表明，B组试验优于A组试验，且耐受性更好。
