The aim of the present research was to compare three dimensionally between the fixed tongue guard and the fixed tongue spur appliances in treatment of anterior open bite.Sixteen patients were selected with age range 8-11 years with anterior open bite, tongue thrust habit and class I malocclusion. 4 patients were excluded during the treatment period due to oral hygiene measures and psychological disturbance. The remaining 12 patients were divided into two groups, 6 patients in each group. The first group was treated by fixed tongue guard while the second group was treated by fixed tongue spur. Treatment period was 6 months. Intra oral and extra oral photos were taken pre-treatment, mid –treatment and after 6 months of treatment. CBCTs were done before insertion of the appliances and 6 months later. A custom made CBCT analysis was designed and measured using Anatomage software.Statistical analysis was performed on the gathered data, from the results obtained and within the limitations of this study. The following conclusions could be withdrawn:1- There was a significant correction of the anterior open bite in the tongue guard group (Group A).2- All the skeletal anteroposterior and vertical measurement showed decreased values in the tongue guard group with variable significance.3- The tongue guard group (Group A) showed significant mesial movement of the upper 1st molar contributing to a Class II molar relation and extrusion of lower 1st molar.4- There was a significant correction of the anterior open bite in the tongue spur group (Group B).5- The fixed tongue spur group showed significant decrease in the skeletal antero-posterior measurements except for the SNB angle it showed significant increase.6- The fixed tongue spur group showed highly significant decrease in most of the skeletal vertical measurements.7- The fixed tongue spur group showed significant increase in upper incisors inclination, upper 1st molar tipping and height.8- When comparing fixed tongue guard group (Group A) and fixed tongue spur group (Group B), the tongue spur showed more significant superior skeletal and clinical results.