Abstract: Objective: To investigate the curative effect of mini implant implants and oral arch on the treatment of superior dental arch protrusion. Methods: From January 2015 to February 2016, 80 patients with up-per arch protrusion were selected. In the control group, the maxillary protraction was performed on the arch of the mouth outside the arch, and the mini-implant was used to treat the maxillary protraction. The effect of correction of maxillary arch protrusion was compared between the two groups. After the correc-tion, the length of incisors was reduced and the width of incision was closed. The UI-SN angle and LI-MP angle of patients before and after intervention were compared. Results: The curative effect of maxillary protraction in mini group was higher than that in control group(P<0.05). In the observation group, 33 pa-tients were markedly effective, 6 were effective, 1 was ineffective, 39 were effective, and the total effective rate was 97.50%. In the control group, 21 were markedly effective, 9 effective, 10 ineffective and 30 effec-tive. Efficiency 75.00%. The UI-SN angle and LI-MP angle of the two groups before intervention were 81.31±3.15° and 98.13±7.11° in the mini-group and 81.32±3.16° and 98.13± 7.16° in the control group,respectively the angle of LI-MP was superior to the control group, mini-group 78.13±2.51°, 105.24±8.26°, control group 80.78±2.46°, 99.24±7.12° P<0.05. After the mini group orthodontic treatment, the length of the incisors was 2.65 ± 1.41mm, 6.87 ± 1.83mm larger than that of the control group(2.12 ± 1.01mm, 5.12±1.23mm, P<0.05). Conclusion: Compared with the treatment of superior arch protrusion by mini-implant support, the effect of mini-implant support is better and the reduction of incisors length, incisors width and head shadow measurement results, correction effect is good, it is worth promoting.

Key words: micro implant implants, estuary arch, upper arch protrusion, efficacy, comparison