Backgrounds: There were no questions about the superiority of DES over BMS in terms of reducing angiographic restenosis. However, the long-term safety of DES is far less certain. The aim of this study was to compare the longterm outcomes of DES and BMS in real world. Methods: Total 2313 patients [BMS:DES=759(32.8%):1554(67.2%), mean age DES=62짹10 vs BMS=61짹10 years, (male %) DES vs BMS=64.6% vs 70.3%] were enrolled and they were registered to The Catholic University Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Registry from January 2004 to March 2006. We included the patients only if the follow up duration was at least 12 months. The primary objective was all cause mortality and secondary objectives were cardiac mortality and stent thrombosis. The presence or abscence of such events were investigated by telephone interview and database from National Health Insurance. Stent thrombosis was determined based on the definition of the Academic Research Consortium (ARC). Results:1. Mean follow up duration of BMS and DES was 41.9짹13.9 month and 25짹 8.6 month respectively(p<0.05). 2. DES group had significantly smaller stents in diameter(3.2짹1.7mm vs 3.9 짹3.8mm, p=0.00) and longer stents (22.5짹6.2mm vs 17.6짹4.6mm, p=0.00) than BMS group. 3. There were no significant differences in all cause mortality, cardiac mortality and stent thrombosis rate between 2 groups(table). 4. In DES group, the numbers of stent thrombosis met definite, probable and possible criteria were 2, 4, and 8 respectively and in BMS group, 2 cases were probable and 2 cases were possible. Conclusion: Our results suggest that BMS and DES have similar safety outcome in a long term period but rate of stent thrombosis tends to be higher in patients with DES than BMS implantation