OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: This study reviews the published outcomes related to surgical (open, endoscopic, and endoscopic-assisted) and nonsurgical treatment for esthesioneuroblastoma. STUDY DESIGN: Literature meta-analysis. METHODS: A meta-analysis of individual patient data for esthesioneuroblastoma publications between 1992 (the earliest identified description of endoscopic resection) and 2008 was conducted. A total of 49 journal articles, comprising 1,170 cases of esthesioneuroblastoma, were included in the study. Criteria for meta-analysis inclusion were five or more patients in a study with sufficient patient data resolution for analysis. Twenty-three studies comprising 361 patients met all inclusion criteria. The overall treatment and outcome at final follow-up of each patient was recorded. Patients were pooled according to treatment techniques and compared to one another using a Kaplan-Meier survival curve and the Mann-Whitney U test to examine differences in follow-up times and publication years. RESULTS: Log-rank tests showed a greater published survival rate for endoscopic surgery compared to open surgery (P = .0019), even when stratifying for publication year (P = .0018). There was no significant difference in follow-up time. Review of Kadish tumor staging for each modality showed larger tumors were more often treated with an open approach, but open and endoscopic survival measures were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that endoscopic surgery is a valid treatment method with comparable survival to open surgery. Further prospective analysis will be beneficial.