목적: The aim of this study is to compare the prolapse repair success and complication rate between women with symptomatic vaginal vault prolapse (VVP) versus uterovaginal prolapse (UtVP) in patients undergoing prolapse repair with apical suspension. 방법: A retrospective cohort study comparing outcomes of VVP and UtVP participant who underwent surgical correction was performed.326 participants had symptomatic uterine prolapse of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) stage 3-4, they underwent ASC, VH and ICG procedures including apical repair. Anatomic assessment was based on the POP-Q system and postoperative work-up was performed after surgery. The primary outcome was treatment success at 12 months according to both objective criteria (no recurrence of any prolapse ≥ stage II, and no retreatment) and subjective criteria 결과: During the study period, 326 women were included for final analysis; 109 underwent VVP and 217 underwent UtVP apical repair. In basal characteristics, participant undergoing VVP repair were older (66.99±8.2 vs 63.16±9.9, P value 0.001), more likely to have undergone previous prolapse repair history (37.6% vs 11.1%, P value <0.0001) There was no significant difference in body mass index (BMI), parity, vaginal parity, home delivery history or difficult labor history between VVP and UtVP groups. All of 2 groups achieved a significant and comparable correction of prolapse. Postoperative point C measurements did not vary between groups (-7.7±1.5 vs -7.9±2.3, P value=0.39) The rates of postoperative complications of the 2 groups were not statistically different. And overall success was similar between groups (OR 1.3 for VVP as. UtVP, 95% CI 0.60-2.76, P value 0.55) 결론: Surgical repair success rate of VVP and UtVP were not different as measured by standardized anatomical outcomes. Both VVP and UtVP patients were restored normal pelvic anatomy. Likewise, no difference were found in complication rate.