Background: The tooth is a repository of stem cells, garnering interest in recent years for its therapeutic potential. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to test the hypothesis that dental stem cell administration can reduce blood glucose and ameliorate polyneuropathy in diabetes mellitus. The scope of clinical translation was also assessed. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, Ovid, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched for animal studies that were published in or before July 2023. A search was conducted in OpenGrey for unpublished manuscripts. Subgroup analyses were performed to identify potential sources of heterogeneity among studies. The risk for publication bias was assessed by funnel plot, regression, and rank correlation tests. Internal validity, external validity, and translation potential were determined using the SYRCLE (Systematic Review Center for Laboratory Animal Experimentation) risk of bias tool and comparative analysis. Results: Out of 5031 initial records identified, 17 animal studies were included in the review. There was a significant decrease in blood glucose in diabetes-induced animals following DSC administration compared to that observed with saline or vehicle (SMD: −3.905; 95% CI: −5.633 to −2.177; p = 0.0004). The improvement in sensory nerve conduction velocity (SMD: 4.4952; 95% CI: 0.5959 to 8.3945; p = 0.035) and capillary-muscle ratio (SMD: 2.4027; 95% CI: 0.8923 to 3.9132; p = 0.0095) was significant. However, motor nerve conduction velocity (SMD: 3.1001; 95% CI: −1.4558 to 7.6559; p = 0.119) and intra-epidermal nerve fiber ratio (SMD: 1.8802; 95% CI: −0.4809 to 4.2413; p = 0.0915) did not increase significantly. Regression (p < 0.0001) and rank correlation (p = 0.0018) tests indicated the presence of funnel plot asymmetry. Due to disparate number of studies in subgroups, the analyses could not reliably explain the sources of heterogeneity. Interpretation: The direction of the data indicates that DSCs can provide good glycemic control in diabetic animals. However, methodological and reporting quality of preclinical studies, heterogeneity, risk of publication bias, and species differences may hamper translation to humans. Appropriate dose, mode of administration, and preparation must be ascertained for safe and effective use in humans. Longer-duration studies that reflect disease complexity and help predict treatment outcomes in clinical settings are warranted. This review is registered in PROSPERO (number CRD42023423423).