OBJECTIVE The Trifecta valve (St Jude Medical, St Paul, Minn) is a new bioprosthetic heart valve designed for supra-annular aortic valve replacement. We compared the hemodynamic performance of the Trifecta against the Perimount-Magna and Magna-Ease valve prostheses (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, Calif) in a nonrandomized, observational, single-center study. METHODS A total of 346 consecutive patients with aortic valve disease underwent aortic valve replacement between January 2003 and November 2011, with implantation of the Trifecta (group 1, n = 121), the Perimount-Magna (group 2, n = 126), or the Magna Ease bioprosthesis (group 3, n = 99). Clinical and hemodynamic data were prospectively recorded and compared. Hemodynamic performance was evaluated by transthoracic echocardiography, including mean pressure gradient (MPG) and aortic valve area (AVA) at baseline, discharge, and 6-month follow-up. A multivariate model of covariance analysis was constructed to further compare the primary study end points of MPG and AVA at 6-month follow-up. RESULTS For all valve sizes, unadjusted MPGs did not differ (P = .08), but AVAs differed (P < .001) between groups at 6-month follow-up. After final adjustment by a multivariate model of covariance analysis, neither the MPGs (P = .16) nor the AVAs (P = .92) at 6 months postoperatively were influenced by the type of prosthesis used. CONCLUSIONS The present observational study is the first to compare the new Trifecta valve with well-established supra-annular aortic valve bioprostheses from a hemodynamic perspective. Although mean pressure gradients and aortic valve areas seem to be advantageous at 6-month follow-up with the new Trifecta valve, after multivariate covariance analysis, no influence of prosthesis type on mean pressure gradient or aortic valve area could be demonstrated.