Objective To compare the therapeutic effect of procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids （PPH） and Block repair procedure for rectocele．Methods A retrospective study of 62 patients with surgical treatment for rectocele was analyzed．The patients were divided into PPH group （n=32） and Block group （n=30） according to the different operation procedure．The symptoms score of improvement of the patients after surgery was compared between the two groups， including operation time，intraoperative blood loss， postoperative pain score， required analgesic times， postoperative complications，hospitalization time，and hospitalization expenses．Results The symptoms of constipation of patients in two groups was significantly improved afer operation．Comparing one month with three months of Longo’s obstructed defecation syndrome （ODS） score after the operation，there was no significant difference in the PPH group（P＞0.05）， but significant difference in the Block group（P＜0.01）．Although the expenses of the PPH group was much higher than that of the Block group （P＜0.01）， the outcomes of the PPH group were much better than those of the Block group （P＜0.01）， including the postoperative Longo’s ODS score of one month and three months，operation time，intraoperative blood loss， postoperative pain score，required analgesic times，and hospitalization time．Two cases of lightly postoperative incontinence occurred in the PPH group，but completely recovered after three months in the clinical follow-up．Conclusions The PPH is as safe and effective as Block repair procedure for rectocele. The short time effect and lower recurrence rate of the PPH are better than those of the Block repair procedure．