background:The main healthcare funding systems in Brazil, the public and the private healthcare systems (PuHS and PrHS, respectively), have peculiar characteristics and cover almost all patients referred for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Our objective was to identify population differences and PCI hospital outcomes in patients using both systems. Methods: From August 2006 to November 2010, 4,957 consecutive patients were submitted to PCI, 2,802 (56.5%) were from the PuHS and 2,155 from the PrHS. results: Patients from the PuHS were younger, had less education, greater incidence of smoking, prior myocardial infarction (MI), single-vessel disease, left ventricular dysfunction, and received more direct stenting. In the PrHS group, there was more diabetes, dyslipidemia, prior coronary bypass graft surgery (CABG) and PCI, prior stroke, chronic renal failure, ST-segment elevation and non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes, restenotic lesions, long lesions, primary PCIs, use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and drug-eluting stents. PCI success (96% vs. 96,1%; P = 0.87), MI (1.7% vs. 1.8%; P = 0.72), CABG (0.1% vs. 0.2%; P = 0.85), stroke (0.1% vs. 0.1%; P > 0.99) and death (1% vs. 1.2%; P = 0.48) were not different between groups. Conclusions: Patients from the PrHS had greater clinical and angiographic complexity than those from the PuHS. However, these differences did not affect the success of the procedure
