Fluoroscopy is a reliable, easy, and readily available technique to follow-up prosthesis functioning after heart valve surgery. The different orientation given to the prosthesis may represent a limitation of the technique accounting for unsatisfactory results in 10% to 40% of the cases. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether and to what extent different intraoperative valve orientation influence feasibility and accuracy of postoperative fluoroscopic evaluation of bileaflet prostheses. We prospectively evaluated 90 patients who had aortic, mitral, and/or tricuspid valve replacement with Sorin Bicarbon or CarboMedics bileaflet prostheses. Fifty percent of the patients in each group were randomly assigned to receive prostheses oriented in a perpendicular or a parallel position with respect to the ventricular septum. Fluoroscopic evaluation was considered appropriate when the prosthesis' "tilting disk" projection was obtained. The valve's hemodynamic performance was investigated through Doppler study. A proper fluoroscopic evaluation was rapidly (15 +/- 5 seconds) achieved in all patients with the former orientation, whereas it was impossible to obtain it in 8 of 20 (40%), 19 of 20 (95%), and 4 of 5 (80%) of patients with the latter orientation. In the remaining patients extremely angulated, uneasy projection was often required to get a correct fluoroscopic image. The Doppler study showed a similarly favorable hemodynamic performance regardless of valve orientation. Prosthesis orientation crucially affects the rate of success of the fluoroscopic evaluation. The orientation perpendicular to the ventricular septum greatly facilitates the postoperative feasibility and accuracy of fluoroscopy, and it is not detrimental to the valve's hemodynamic performance. This valve orientation may provide a better fluoroscopic window whenever a valve dysfunction is suspected.