From grading to guidelines: recommendations for safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy based on the Parkland grading system
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20261564Keywords:
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy, Parkland grading scale, Recommendations, Fundus-first technique, Open cholecystectomyAbstract
Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is one of the most studied laparoscopic surgeries. Recently parkland grading scale has added a simple intra-operative component to assessing difficulty of cholecystectomy. We aim to utilise this Parkland grading system for formulating recommendations on how to proceed in the surgery.
Methods: This was a retrospective study of recorded laparascopic cholecystectomies done at Max Hospital, Gurugram, Haryana. All the patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy from October 2022 to March 2024. The Parkland grading scale (PGS) was noted at the start of the surgery and thereafter the progression of surgery was studied under various headings. All the pre-operative, intra-operative and post-operative findings were assessed to formulate recommendations for safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Results: A total of 416 patients were graded utilizing PGS system. Out of 416 gall bladders graded, 127 (29.3%) were assessed to be grade 1, 146 (35.1%) were grade 2, 90 (21.6%)were grade 3, 34 (8.1%) were grade 4 and 24 (5.7%) were grade 5 as per PGS. When talking about any alteration to standard approach of doing a lap cholecystectomy, fundus first approach was the first change used by the operative surgeons. 32.2% of patients in PGS 3 had to be converted to fundus first approach, 61.7% of PGS 4 and 75% of PGS 5 patients had same surgical fate. Conversion to open cholecystectomy was also done in a small number of patients. Only 3 out of 34 and 4 out of 24 patients from PGS 4 and 5 respectively underwent this bailout procedure. Use of harmonic scalpel was used more frequently in higher grades of PGS as high as 95.8% patients in PGS 5 and 50% patients in PGS 4 and 11% in PGS 3. The use of hemolock for clipping of vessel and ducts was similar in occurrences 50% in PGS 5 and 35.2% in PGS 4, 5% in PGS 2, 8.8% in PGS 3. When studied about intra-op injuries, vascular injuries although low in number had a relative increased incidence with increasing parkland grade
Conclusion: PGS can be highly predictive for difficult cholecystectomy and every surgeon with or without adequate experience should be aware of potential complications. PGS grade 4 and higher have higher rate of conversion to fundus-first approach. PGS 4 and 5 had lesser complication rates and have shorter operative time if the decision to convert to a fundus first or open cholecystectomy was taken earlier. Planning appropriate line of further management without wasting much time is what we advocate. The author would like to stress upon the fact that no role of subtotal cholecystectomy was found in our study when timely decisions regarding change in approach was taken.
References
Gutt CN, Encke J, Köninger J, Harnoss JC, Weigand K, Kipfmüller K, et al. Acute cholecystitis: early versus delayed cholecystectomy, a multicenter randomized trial (ACDC study, NCT00447304). Ann Surg. 2013;258(3):385-93.
Bouarfa L, Schneider A, Feussner H, Navab N, Lemke HU, Jonker PP, et al. Prediction of intraoperative complexity from preoperative patient data for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Artif Intell Med. 2011;52:169-76.
Kama NA, Kologlu M, Doganay M, Reis E, Atli M, Dolapci M. A risk score for conversion from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy. Am J Surg. 2001;181:520-5.
Hirota M, Takada T, Kawarada Y, Nimura Y, Miura F, Hirata K, et al, et al. Diagnostic criteria and severity assessment of acute cholecystitis: Tokyo Guidelines. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2007;14(1):78-82.
Inoue K, Ueno T, Douchi D, Shima K, Goto S, Takahashi M, et al. Risk factors for difficulty of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in grade II acute cholecystitis according to the Tokyo guidelines 2013. BMC Surg. 2017;17:1-8.
Randhawa JS, Pujahari AK. Preoperative prediction of difficult lap chole: a scoring method. Indian J Surg. 2009;71(4):198-201.
Kuldip S, Ashish O. Difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a large series from north India. Indian J Surg. 2006;68(4):205-8.
Gupta N, Ranjan G, Arora MP, Goswami B, Chaudhary P, Kapur A, et al. Validation of a scoring system to predict difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Int J Surg. 2013;1(9):1002-6.
Vivek MA, Augustine A, Rao R. A comprehensive predictive scoring method for difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Minim Access Surg. 2014;10(2):62.
Agrawal N, Singh S, Khichy S. Preoperative Prediction of Difficult Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Scoring Method. Niger J Surg. 2023;21(2):130.
Madni TD, Leshikar DE, Minshall CT, Nakonezny PA, Cornelius CC, Imran JB et al. The Parkland grading scale for cholecystitis. Am J Surg. 2018;215(4):625-30.
Shyamkrishnan R, Saharia GK, Panda S, Mangaraj M. Evaluation of Homocysteine and Gamma-Glutamyl Transferase Concentrations As Markers of Chronic Kidney Disease: An Indian Perspective. Cureus. 2022;14(3).
Hickman MS, Schwesinger WH, Page CP. Acute Cholecystitis in the Diabetic: A Case-Control Study of Outcome. Arch Surg. 1988;123(4):409-11.
Mahmud S, Masaud M, Canna K, Nassar AH. Fundus-first laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc. 2002;16:581-4.
Gupta A, Agarwal PN, Kant R, Malik V. Evaluation of fundus-first laparoscopic cholecystectomy. JSLS. 2004;8:255-8.
Zaidi AH, Haleem A, Rana S. Use of harmonic scalpel in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Pak Arm F Med J. 2011;31(1).