Retrospective validation of parkland grading scale in a Latin-American high-volume center

Background Increased complication rates following laparoscopic cholecystectomies have been described, likely related to surgical difficulty, anatomical variations, and gallbladder inflammation severity. Parkland Grading Scale (PGS) stratifies the severity of intraoperative findings to predict operative difficulty and complications. This study aims to validate PGS as a postoperative-outcome predictive tool, comparing its performance with Tokyo Guidelines Grading System (TGGS). Methods This is a single-center retrospective cohort study where PGS and TGGS performances were evaluated regarding intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. Both univariate and bivariate analyses were performed on each severity grading scale using STATA-SE 16.0 software. Additionally, we proposed a Logistic Regression Model for each scale. Their association with outcomes was compared between both scales by their Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve. Results 400 Patients were included. Grade 1 predominance was observed for both PGS and TGGS (47.36% and 25.3%, respectively). A positive association was observed between higher PGS grades and inpatient postoperative care, length of stay, ICU care, and antibiotic requirement. Based on the area under the ROC curve, better performance was observed for PGS over TGGS in the evaluated outcomes. Conclusion PGS performed better than TGGS as a predictive tool for inpatient postoperative care, length of stay, ICU, and antibiotic requirement, especially in severe cases.