AIM: To evaluate the premise, that biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents(BD-DES) could improve clinical outcomes compared to second generation permanent polymer drug eluting stents(PP-DES), we pooled the data from all the available randomized control trials(RCT) comparing the clinical performance of both these stents.METHODS: A systematic literature search of Pub Med, Cochrane, Google scholar databases, EMBASE, MEDLINE and SCOPUS was performed during time period of January 2001 to April 2015 for RCT and comparing safety and efficacy of BD-DES vs second generation PP-DES. The primary outcomes of interest were definite stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization, myocardial infarction, cardiac deaths and total deaths during the study period. RESULTS: A total of 11 RCT’s with a total of 12644 patients were included in the meta-analysis, with 6598 patients in BD-DES vs 6046 patients in second generation PP-DES. The mean follow up period was 16 mo. Pooled analysis showed non-inferiority of BD-DES, comparing events of stent thrombosis(OR = 1.42, 95%CI: 0.79-2.52, P = 0.24), target lesion revascularization(OR = 0.99, 95%CI: 0.84-1.17, P = 0.92), myocardial infarction(OR = 1.06, 95%CI: 0.86-1.29, P = 0.92), cardiac deaths(OR = 1.07, 95%CI 0.82-1.41, P = 0.94) and total deaths(OR = 0.96, 95%CI: 0.80-1.17, P = 0.71).CONCLUSION: BD-DES, when compared to second generation PP-DES, showed no significant advantage and the outcomes were comparable between both the groups. AIM: To evaluate the premise, that biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents (BD-DES) could improve clinical outcomes compared to second generation permanent polymer drug eluting stents (PP-DES), we pooled the data from all the available randomized control trials (RCT ) comparing the clinical performance of both these stents. METHODS: A systematic literature search of Pub Med, Cochrane, Google Scholar databases, EMBASE, MEDLINE and SCOPUS was performed during time period January 2001 to April 2015 for RCT and comparing safety and efficacy of BD-DES vs second generation PP-DES. The primary outcomes of interest were invasive stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization, myocardial infarction, cardiac deaths and total deaths during the study period. RESULTS: A total of 11 RCT’s with a total of 12644 patients were included in the meta-analysis, with 6598 patients in BD-DES vs 6046 patients in second generation PP-DES. The mean follow up period was 16 months. Pooled analysis showed non-infer iority of BD-DES, comparing events of stent thrombosis (OR = 1.42, 95% CI: 0.79-2.52, P = 0.24), target lesion revascularization (OR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.84-1.17, P = 0.92) (OR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.82-1.41, P = 0.94) and total deaths (OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.86-1.29, P = 0.92) 0.80-1.17, P = 0.71) .CONCLUSION: BD-DES, when compared to second generation PP-DES, showed no significant advantage and the outcomes were comparable between both groups.