摘要：
BACKGROUND:A large number ofstudiesfocused onmeshapplicationin the whole pelvic floor reconstructive surgery, but the comparative researchon the Prolift meshandpolypropylene mesh (Gynemesh) in the whole pelvic floor reconstructionisrarely reported. n OBJECTIVE:To compare the Prolift mesh with Gynemesh in the whole pelvic floor reconstructive surgery. n METHODS:Totaly 90femalepatients with pelvic organ prolapsewereenroled, aged40 to 80 years old, and were randomly divided into Prolift group and Gynemesh group, who were subjectedto ful pelvic floor reconstruction with Prolift mesh or Gynemesh, respectively.Afterwards,operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative vaginal bleeding, hematoma, local paresthesia, urinary retention, overactive bladder, residual urine, postoperative incision infection, mesh exposure and postoperative quality of life were comparedin two groups. n RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:No hematoma, local paresthesia, urinary retention and rejection reactions appeared in both two groups. The operation time, intraoperative blood residual urine, length of stay, catheter retention time had no significant differences between two groups. In the Prolift group, one casehad a smal amount of vaginal bleeding, one case had overactive bladder, five cases had mesh exposure at the anterior wal of vaginal, and two cases had light stress urinary incontinence; inthe Gynemesh group, no vaginal bleeding, overactive bladder and stress urinary incontinence occurred, but four cases had mesh exposure at the anterior wal of vaginal.Additionaly,thescores on the quality of life inthe two groups at the last folow-upwere significantly lower than those before surgery (P 0.05). These results demonstrate that both Prolift system and Gynemesh aresafe and effective for the whole pelvic floor reconstruction,resulting infew postoperative complications.Patients can quickly recover,andobtain satisfactory outcomes.%背景：多数学者对补片在全盆底重建中的应用进行了研究，但关于 Prolift 网片与聚丙烯网片在全盆底重建中对比的研究不多。n 目的：对比Prolift网片与聚丙烯网片在全盆底重建中的效果。n 方法：纳入女性盆腔脏器脱垂患者90例，年龄40-80岁，随机分2组，分别采用Prolift全盆底修复网片与聚丙烯网片进行全盆底重建治疗。比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、术后阴道出血、血肿情况、局部感觉异常、尿潴留、膀胱过度活动症、残余尿、术后切口感染、网片暴露情况及术后生活质量。n 结果与结论：①两组均未出现血肿、局部感觉异常，未出现尿潴留及排异反应。两组手术时间、术中出血量、术后残余尿量、保留尿管时间和住院时间比较差异无显著性意义；②Prolift网片组45例中有1例出现少量阴道出血，1例发生膀胱过度活动症，5例发生阴道前壁网片暴露，2例发生轻度压力性尿失禁；聚丙烯网片组45例中未出现阴道出血、压力性尿失禁和膀胱过度活动症，4例发生阴道前壁网片暴露；③两组末次随访生活质量评分低于治疗前(P0.05)；④结果表明：采用Prolift全盆底悬吊系统和聚丙烯网片进行全盆底重建均安全有效，术后并发症少，恢复快，近期疗效满意。
