I would say that history would not have changed too much.
Napoleon had alienated most of Kings of Europe, either by becoming King despite his humble origins1 or by invading/breaking all of major nations of Europe2. Remember that at his fall, he was fighting against Russia, Prussia, Austria, England and Spain.
Additionally, after twenty years of war, France was depleted of military manpower. I read some comments stating that some of the French troops at Waterloo were so young and hastily sent to the front lines, that they barely knew how to load their weapons.
Had he won at Waterloo, after a year or two the coalition would have arrayed new armies and would have pushed Napoleon out of power again, even if only by sheer numbers.
The possible side effects could have been greatest Russian and Austrian influence (since their troops would have been needed again), and less British influence in Europe (which could result in Belgium not regaining its independence in 1830).
The Austrian and Russian advantage would have been quickly lost, since both had severe internal divisions and because they were not playing the games that eventually were decisive (Industrial Revolution and Colonialism).
1 Probably they did not want people in their own countries getting weird ideas.
2 Additionally, he promoted the Napoleonic code that, while absolutist, drew some ideas from the French Revolution (making him more dangerous to the status quo than the usual conqueror).