目的:比较盆底网片悬吊术与传统经阴道子宫切除在临床上治疗盆底功能障碍的效果差别。方法:将120例盆底器官脱垂患者分为网片组及传统组各60例,患者均为POP-Q评分Ⅲ、Ⅳ度。网片组40例保留子宫,20例因为伴有子宫或宫颈疾病行子宫切除,有压力性尿失禁的患者同时行尿道中段悬吊术(TVT-O)。传统组行阴式子宫切除和阴道前后壁修补及会阴修补术。结果:两组在手术时间、手术出血、住院天数、住院费用上差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),术后3个月及6个月随访复发差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),在1年随访复发差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:盆底网片悬吊术比传统经阴道子宫切除在治疗盆底器官脱垂中更加有效。缺点是费用偏高。 Objective: To compare the effect of pelvic floor mesh suspension with traditional vaginal hysterectomy in the treatment of pelvic floor dysfunction. Methods: 120 patients with pelvic organ prolapse were divided into mesh group and conventional group of 60 patients, the patients were POP-Q score Ⅲ, Ⅳ degrees. In the mesh group, 40 patients retained the uterus and 20 patients underwent hysterectomy (TVT-O) with urinary incontinence due to hysterectomy with uterine or cervical disease. The traditional group of vaginal hysterectomy and vaginal anterior and posterior wall repair and perineal repair. Results: There were significant differences in operation time, operation bleeding, hospitalization days and hospitalization costs between the two groups (P <0.05), but there was no significant difference between the two groups in the follow-up of 3 months and 6 months (P> 0.05) There was a significant difference in recurrence at 1-year follow-up (P <0.05). Conclusion: The pelvic floor mesh suspension is more effective than traditional transvaginal hysterectomy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. The disadvantage is the high cost.