Objective We sought to compare quality of life and patient satisfaction after obliterative vs reconstructive surgery. Study Design A retrospective cohort study of women who met the following inclusion criteria: age 65 years or older, leading edge of prolapse 4 cm or greater beyond the hymen, and vaginal reconstructive or obliterative surgery. Preoperative responses to the Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6) and Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ-7) were collected retrospectively. We then mailed the same questionnaires, and the Surgical Satisfaction Questionnaire (SSQ-8), to these subjects postoperatively. Results Mode of surgery was evenly split (n = 45 per group) between the 90 patients meeting the inclusion criteria. Improvements from the preoperative to postoperative Incontinence Impact Questionnaire and Urogenital Distress Inventory were comparable as were postoperative Surgical Satisfaction Questionnaire scores. Conclusion Improvements in condition-specific quality of life and postoperative patient satisfaction measures are comparable in women with prolapse who undergo either reconstructive or obliterative surgery.