Differences of computed tomography pulmonary angiography versus ventilation-perfusion lung scan in pregnant patients with suspected acute pulmonary embolism are not well-known, leading to ongoing debate on which test to choose. We searched in PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of science and Cochrane library databases and identified all relevant articles and abstracts published up to October1st 2017. We assessed diagnostic efficiency, frequency of non-diagnostic results and radiation exposure for patient and fetus. We included 13 studies for the diagnostic efficiency analysis, 30 for non-diagnostic results analysis and 22 for radiation exposure analysis. Pooled rate of false negative test results was 0% for both imaging strategies with overlapping confidence intervals. The pooled rate of non-diagnostic results with computed tomography pulmonary angiography and ventilation-perfusion lung scan were 12% (95%CI 8-17) and 14% (95%CI 10-18), respectively. Reported maternal and fetal radiation exposure doses were well below the safety threshold, but could not be compared between computed tomography pulmonary angiography and ventilation-perfusion lung scan given the lack of high quality data. Both imaging tests seem equally safe to rule out PE in pregnancy. We found no significant differences in efficiency and radiation exposures between computed tomography pulmonary angiography and ventilation-perfusion lung scan although direct comparisons were not possible. .