The design of self-expandible nitinol stents might be different depending on the developed time; The first-generation nitinol stents (e.g., LuminexxTM and SmartTM) showed a remarkably high rate of stent strut fracture. A second generation of slotted tube nitinol stents has been developed. These stents had a better flexibility, by reducing the number of connections between cells or crowns, and by configurating spiral orientation of these interconnections. Several studies reported that these nitinol stents are more fracture-resistant and more flexible, some of them providing superior patency rate (e.g., LifeTM and EverflexTM). However, the one of the important limitations to their studies is that those was the non-randomized study of relative small sample size or was confined to in-vitro. Upto date, the multicenter, randomized controlled trial for direct comparison of stent fracture and primary patency between two different nitinol stents has not been done except one study; SMART versus Luminexx stent. SMART and Luminexx stent have been classified into 1st generation self-expandable nitinol stent. Complete-SE stent of Medtronic company was different to Smart stent of Cordis company in that the configuration of interconnection of Complete-SE stent had peak-to-peak connection and more spiral orientation of interconnection, compared to mart stent. On the other hand, Smart stent has the peak-to-valley bridge and in-line interconnection. Medtronics company have claimed Complete's stent crowns have been configured to minimize crown to crown interaction, increasing the stent's flexibility without compromising radial strength. We made the hypothesis that the design of Complete-SE stent might be more fracture-resistant or effective for in-stent restenosis, compared with Smart stent.