Background : For the past 10 years, in-stent restenosis(ISR) has been the most important issue in interventional cardiology and brachytherapy was the only proven methods to treat ISR. Newly appeared drug-eluting stents, paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES), TAXUSTM, and sirolimus-eluting stent (SES), CypherTM, showed a quite good short-term results in the treatment of ISR in previous company driven large scale studies. But, little is known about the results of direct comparison between the revascularization methods for ISR. Methods and Results : We compared the 6month follow-up clinical and angiographic results of 4 groups : Cutting balloon(CB, n=20), brachytheraphy(BR, n=37), PES (n=23) and SES (n=54) group. Total 134 lesions were analyzed. We compared the overall rate of target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR) and major adverse cardiac event (MACE). MACE includes TLR, TVR, myocardial infarction and cardiac death. Overall TLR, TVR, MACE rate of ISR lesion treatment were 14.5%, 17.1% and 17.1% respectively. The CB group showed a higher TLR(25.0%), TVR(30.0%) and MACE(30.0%) rate than BR group(TLR : 8.11%, TVR : 8.11%, MACE : 8.11%, p<0.04) or SES group (TLR : 10.3%, TVR : 12.8%, MACE : 12.8%, p = NS), but showed similar rate with PES (TLR : 23.8%, TVR : 28.6%, MACE : 28.6%, p= NS). The SES group showed comparable results of MACE with BR group. But, PES group showed a significantly higher rate of MACE when compared with BR group (p<0.05). The difference between PES and SES was statistically insignificant, but, PES group had a trend of increased TLR, TVR and MACE. Conclusion : Our data did not reached statistical significance due to small lesion number, but showed differences in MACE rate between two types of drug eluting stents. In the mean time, SES showed good short-term results, but we have to carefully look after the long-term follow-up results as we learned a lot from brachytherapy long-term data.