Objective To compare the curative effect of procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (PPH) with MilliganMorgan hemorrhoidectomy (MMH) for acute incarcerated hemorrhoids. Methods A retrospective study of 103 patients with acute incarcerated hemorrhoids treated by surgery was performed. The patients were divided into PPH group (n=58) and MMH group (n=45) according to the different operation program who underwent. Operative time, pain score of VAS, time required for anodyne, postoperative complications, hospital stay, and hospital charges were compared. Results The symptoms were both relieved in two groups patients. Although the hospital charges of patients in MMH group were fewer, the patients in PPH group had advantages of shorter operative time, less postoperative pain, lower requirement for anodyne, fewer complications (edema of anal edge), and shorter hospital stay (Plt;0.01). Conclusion PPH is as safe and effective as MMH, and furthermore its short-term therapeutic effect is better than MMH.