Challenges in Differential Diagnosis and Management of Lymphoepithelial Sialadenitis (LESA): A Scoping Review.

Background: Lymphoepithelial sialadenitis (LESA) is a chronic lymphoid-rich inflammatory disorder of the salivary glands that is strongly associated with Sjögren's disease and may overlap clinically, radiologically, and histopathologically with IgG4-related sialadenitis, HIV-associated lymphoepithelial lesions, chronic sialadenitis, salivary gland tumors, and extranodal marginal zone B-cell lymphoma of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT lymphoma). Objective: This scoping review mapped current evidence on diagnostic challenges, differential diagnostic criteria, management strategies, and surveillance considerations for LESA. Eligibility criteria: Sources were selected using the Population-Concept-Context framework and included the literature addressing salivary gland lymphoepithelial lesions, LESA, Sjögren's disease-associated salivary gland involvement, or related lymphoid-rich salivary gland disorders published from 2010 onward. Sources of evidence and charting methods: Google Scholar was searched, records were screened in sequential stages, and relevant data were charted narratively across clinical, serological, imaging, histopathological, immunophenotypic, molecular, therapeutic, and follow-up domains. Results: Thirty-seven sources were included. The evidence indicates that LESA is usually characterized by chronic lymphoplasmacytic inflammation, acinar atrophy, lymphoepithelial lesions, and preserved lobular architecture; however, these findings may overlap with early or established MALT lymphoma. Immunohistochemistry, assessment of light-chain restriction, clonality testing, serological markers, and imaging are useful adjuncts, but no single test is independently definitive. Conservative management and symptomatic care are appropriate for stable disease, whereas corticosteroids, immunomodulatory therapy, sialendoscopy, surgery, radiotherapy, or systemic lymphoma therapy may be considered according to clinical context. Conclusions: LESA requires integrated clinicopathological interpretation and multidisciplinary follow-up. Key evidence gaps include the absence of standardized LESA-specific diagnostic criteria, limited validation of molecular and flow cytometric approaches in salivary gland specimens, and lack of consensus surveillance protocols.