Comparison of outcomes for open versus endoscopic approaches for olfactory neuroblastoma: A systematic review and individual participant data meta‐analysis

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Background</jats:title><jats:p>Endoscopic approaches have been adopted as an alternative to craniofacial resection in the surgical management of olfactory neuroblastoma.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods</jats:title><jats:p>We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and CINAHL (2000–2014) to compare outcomes for open versus endoscopic approaches.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>Thirty‐six studies containing 609 patients were included. Meta‐analysis of (a) all patients, (b) Kadish C/D only, and (c) Hyams III/IV only, failed to show a difference in locoregional control and metastasis‐free survival between approaches. However, endoscopic approaches were associated with improved overall survival (OS) for all 3 groups (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = .001, .04, and .001, respectively), and higher disease‐specific survival (DSS) for all patients (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = .004) and Hyams III/IV only (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = .002).</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title><jats:p>The current study suggests that endoscopic approaches have comparable control rates to open approaches for olfactory neuroblastoma. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. <jats:italic>Head Neck</jats:italic> <jats:bold>38</jats:bold>: E2306–E2316, 2016</jats:p></jats:sec>