Treatment of coronary artery disease has significantly changed over the past decade including an introduction of drug-eluting stents and a more stringent adherence to evidence-based medications. However, the impact of these advanced treatment methods on the practice patterns and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing coronary revascularization in the real world has not been yet fully evaluated. The present study population consisted of the 2 groups of patients who underwent their first coronary revascularization in the Coronary REvascularization Demonstrating Outcome Study in Kyoto Registry Cohort-1 (bare-metal stent era: January 2000 to December 2002, n = 8,986) and Cohort-2 (drug-eluting stent era: January 2005 to December 2007, n = 10,339). Compared with Cohort-1, the proportion of patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention significantly increased in Cohort-2 (73% vs 81%, p <0.001), particularly for 3-vessel disease (50% vs 61%, p <0.001) and left main disease (18% vs 36%, p <0.001). Evidence-based medications were more frequently used in Cohort-2. The cumulative 2-year incidence of and the adjusted risk for all-cause death were not significantly different between Cohort-1 and Cohort-2 (6.2% vs 6.4%, p = 0.69, and hazard ratio [HR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81 to 1.03, p = 0.15). Adjusted risks for both myocardial infarction and repeated coronary revascularization were significantly reduced in Cohort-2 compared with Cohort-1 (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.96, p = 0.02, and HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.77, p <0.001, respectively). In conclusion, despite changes in treatment methods over time, the long-term mortality of patients undergoing coronary revascularization in the real-world clinical practice has not been changed, although there was a significant reduction of myocardial infarction and repeated coronary revascularization.