Background and Aim: Controversy exists on whether complete percutaneous revascularization(PR) is superior to incomplete PR in clinical outcome for patients with Multivessel disease(MVD), especially in the era of the Drug eluting stent(DES). We aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes between complete versus incomplete PR with DES in patients with MVD. Methods and Results: We consecutively analyzed 356 patients with MVD who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with DES at SNUH between Mar 2003 and Aug 2005. MVD was defined as coronary lesions > 50% diameter stenosis in more than one of the major epicardial vessels or their major side branches bigger than 2mm in diameter. Among a total of 356 patients, 112 patients were treated with complete PR, while 244 patients were treated with incomplete PR. Mean age was higher and comorbid conditions (DM or peripheral disease) were more prevalent in the Incomplete PR group. The number of stents per patient was greater in complete PR group (2.82짹1.04 vs 1.61짹0.87, p<0.001). In the short term, complete PR group had more TLR per treated leson within 6 months (9.4% vs 4.8% p=0.08), whereas incomplete PR group had more de novo PCI within 6 months (5.4% vs 7.6 %, p=0.30). The frequency of MACE (AMI, CABG and cardiac death) within 6 months was not significantly different between the two groups (1.8% vs 4.1% p=0.22) As for long-term results, the incidence of cumulative MACE up to 18 months was significantly higher in the incomplete PR group (8.1% vs 1.8%, p=0.014). However, the composite of repeat procedure and MACE within 18 months was not statistically different between the two groups (23.2% vs 23.4% p=0.54). In subgroup analysis, complete PR group with DM had more the composite of repeat procedure and MACE within 18 months than incomplete PR group with DM (40.0% vs 24.5%, p=0.06). By multivariate analysis, baseline ejection fraction and IR were identified as independent predictors of MACE after PCI in patients with MVD(OR 1.07 95% CI 1.03-1.11 and OR 4.71, 95% CI 1.03-21.49). Conclusions: In the DES era, complete PR may be a preferable strategy to incomplete PR for patients with MVD. But, for DM patients with MVD, incomplete PR could be considered.