A recent large-scale, randomized trial demonstrated the noninferiority of a strategy of bivalirudin with provisional glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibition compared with routine GP IIb/IIIa inhibition. There is a paucity of outcome data with bivalirudin use in the setting of real-world experience. We evaluated 6,996 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention between January 2001 and December 2004 to compare early and late outcomes with a bivalirudin-based antithrombotic regimen with those with a heparin-based regimen. Propensity adjustment was performed to correct for baseline differences in patient characteristics. Bivalirudin-based therapy was used in 1,070 patients, heparin only in 801 patients, and heparin plus GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors in 5,125 patients. Compared with patients who received heparin or those who received heparin plus GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors, patients who received bivalirudin had lower incidences of bleeding (blood transfusion rate 1.7% vs 4.0%, p <0.001) and periprocedural myonecrosis (creatine kinase-MB >5 times the upper limit of normal 2.7% vs 4.3%, p = 0.016). Differences in bleeding end points remained significant after adjusting for the propensity to receive bivalirudin, but there was no difference in ischemic events. There was no difference in unadjusted long-term survival rate (log-rank test p = 0.46, total number of deaths 412, mean follow-up 17 months) or in propensity-adjusted long-term survival rate (hazard ratio 1.37, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 2.08, p = 0.14). Compared with heparin with or without GP IIb/IIIa inhibition, the use of bivalirudin in a large consecutive patient registry at a tertiary care center was associated with fewer bleeding events and no evident increase in the incidence of ischemic complications.