The current systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out to compare the diagnostic accuracy of pulp vitality and pulp sensibility tests in assessing pulpal health. PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Open Grey databases were searched and after assessing eligibility criteria the data were extracted. True-positive, false-positive, true-negative, false-negative, sensitivity and specificity values were extracted or calculated if not presented. Quality of studies was evaluated based on the QUADAS 2 tool. Meta-analysis was performed in MetaDTA (v2.0; Shinyapps, RStudio PBC, Boston, MA, USA) and Review Manager 5.3 (RevMan web; The Cochrane Collaboration, London, UK). Ten articles were included for qualitative synthesis and five for meta-analysis. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio for pulse oximeter (PO), electric pulp tester (EPT), cold test (CT) and heat test (HT) was 628.5, 10.75, 17.24 and 3.47, respectively. Pairwise comparison demonstrated a higher pooled mean sensitivity and specificity with PO compared with EPT. Comparison between PO and CT and between PO and HT also demonstrated a higher pooled mean sensitivity and specificity for PO. Summary points on receiver operating characteristic curves confirmed the ability of PO to correctly screen negatives in presenting patients as compared to EPT, CT and HT but no study was rated as good on quality assessment. PO can be considered as the most accurate diagnostic method as compared to EPT, CT and HT. This review provides information about the reliability and diagnostic accuracy of using pulp vitality and sensibility tests for assessing pulp status.