Prospective memory (PM) and cognitive control are core elements of human cognition. However, most existing theories and experimental studies of PM did not consider cognitive control when investigated the process underline PM. Bugg et al. (2013) integrated PM and cognitive control theories, firstly. They found that there were similarity between multiprocess framework (MPF) of PM and dual mechanisms of cognitive control (DMC). For instance these two theories both involved preparation and reflexive process during stimulus producing. More specifically, strategic monitoring in MPF was similar with proactive in DMC for goal-relevant and top-down influences on behavior. While spontaneous retrieval in MPF was similar with reactive in DMC for bottom-up stimulus orientation. Since Bugg et al. (2013), the number of researches focus on cognitive control during PM was accumulating. We firstly reviewed researches about the supportive role of cognitive control to PM. According to three unities of executive control (functional similarity with cognitive control), shifting, updating, and inhibition are involved in PM. Shifting in PM meant the task-switching feature of PM paradigm, switching between PM task and ongoing task, or special ongoing task containing switching. Task-switching increased resources consumption regardless in PM- or ongoing task, and would impair performance of PM task. Updating in PM meant interruptions during task performance, in which keeping previous task in mind with performing present task. It was harmful for PM implementation and may induce catastrophe under particular working condition. Inhibition in PM was required when intention has been finished, suspended or changed. Activation after its completion could be inhibited or not still in dispute now. Under some condition, finished cues would prolong RTs of same stimulus or cause false alarms (commission errors). However, under the other condition these effects would fade. Secondly, differences between PM and cognitive control were discussed, from methods and relevant brain regions. Differences in methods were stimulus with features of cognitive control paradigm and whether one kind of task could imply distinct processes. Cognitive control network comprising dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), dorsal parietal cortex (DPC), anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) (e.g. Breukelaar et al., 2016). While PM did not have a specific brain network for disputation about cost and different retrieval procedure of varying cues. Now anterior PFC, PC, ACC, posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), and insula are involved in PM (Cona et al., 2015). Although PFC, ACC and PC were active during PM and cognitive control, sub-regions and active degree were not the same. Distinct region was insula which was active in PM paradigms. There are still limitation in previous researches, which would give future work three implication: (1) Un-corresponding relationship between PM and cognitive control for more dependent role of PM. This means that future researches could reduce dependence of episodic memory by considering physiology basis during exploring PM’s through ERPs, fMRI and other neurocognitive technologies. (2) Lack of what effects of cognitive control unities and diversities on PM. This means that many kinds of tasks could be utilized in PM researches, to investigate which specific unity effect on PM and how to improve the unity to enhance PM or other relevant cognitive ability. (3) Confusion the differ role between PM and cognitive control in cognitive system. Specifically, PM is more comprehensive for requirement of perception, working memory and attention, while cognitive control is more basic for was required in numerous cognitive activities, for instance emotion. How to integration disputation of cognitive control theories for explaining and understanding PM process is a difficulty of future work.