he treatment of atrial fibrillation has changed greatly in the past decade. Not long ago, the scientific community argued the benefits of a rate-control strategy versus a rhythmcontrol strategy. 1 This argument was always hampered by the relative ineffectiveness of the antiarrhythmic medications used as rhythm-control agents. Ablation therapy for the treatment of atrial fibrillation has quickly evolved. Originally, ablation was focused on finding triggers of atrial fibrillation in the pulmonary veins. 2,3 Now, ablation offers a potential curative strategy for patients with paroxysmal, persistent, or permanent atrial fibrillation. Recent data continue to show that atrial fibrillation ablation is superior to the currently available antiarrhythmic medications in the maintenance of sinus rhythm, and the Food and Drug Administration has approved devices labeled for the ablation of atrial fibrillation. 4 -6 It is estimated that Ͼ2 million people in the United States have atrial fibrillation. 7 Although the number of atrial fibrillation ablations continues to increase year after year, offering this therapy to all potential candidates is impossible because of several limitations. 8,9 A finite number of fellows are being trained in programs that offer a great deal of experience in atrial fibrillation ablation, and there is limited opportunity for practicing electrophysiologists to learn new techniques. Unlike supraventricular tachycardia ablation, atrial fibrillation ablation requires greater technical skill, significantly more lesions, and time. Like many other medical procedures, technological innovation is likely to be a contributing factor in making atrial fibrillation ablation a more commonplace and widely practiced therapy.Navigating the complex anatomy of the left atrium is also difficult to master. Imaging technologies have been used to orient the operator to the anatomy and the location of the ablation catheters in this anatomy. With fluoroscopy alone, it is difficult to determine anterior versus posterior orientation or the presence of the catheter in a pulmonary vein versus the left atrial appendage. Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) provides 2-dimensional navigation assistance and excellent anatomic detail; however, it is difficult to locate the catheter tip at all times in the echocardiography field. Without 3-dimensional (3D) imaging, navigation with ICE alone is also difficult. Electroanatomic mapping (EAM) systems offer a 3D view and nearly real-time catheter tip localization within a created construct of the left atrium, but the data are heavily dependent on the input of the operator and cartographer. Newer technology has merged these 2 imaging modalities to offer the best of both worlds.Remotely obtained computed tomography (CT) imaging of the left atrium has been performed to define the complex anatomy of the left atrium. This can be integrated into EAMs or imaging systems to aid in navigation and procedure planning. However, conditions at the time of CT may be different from those at the time of a...