Aims: To compare tissue coverage in coronary lesions stented with durable fluoropolymer-coated everoli-mus-eluting stents (EES) vs. biodegradable polymer-coated biolimus A9-eluting stents (BES). Methods and results: Sixty-four patients (64 lesions) with de novo coronary artery lesions were randomised to percutaneous treatment with XIENCE ® EES (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) vs. BioMatrix™ BES (Biosensors, Morges, Switzerland). The primary endpoint was the percentage of uncovered struts, as assessed with OCT, at nine months. The average percentage of uncovered struts was significantly lower with EES (4.3±4.8% vs. 8.7±7.8% with BES, p=0.019). There was no difference in the average percentage of malapposed struts at baseline (6.8±6.9% vs. 6.9±7.0%, respectively, p=0.974) and at follow-up (0.1±0.3% vs. 0.6±1.3%, p=0.143). Neointimal thickness at nine months was 109±43 µm in EES vs. 64±18 µm in BES (p<0.001), and angiographic LLL was 0.15 mm in EES vs. 0.10 mm in BES (p=0.581). We did not observe differences in the incidence of MACE and ST. Conclusions: A significantly higher percentage of uncovered struts was detected in the BioMatrix BES