Dear Drs. Benito-Llopis and Teus,We acknowledge that widening our literature search to include articles involving “LASEK” and “surface ablation” would have allowed us to strengthen our assertion that surface ablation enhancements following previous surface ablation procedures are safe and effective, as well stated in Drs. Benito-Llopis and Teu’s 2010 article on this topic [1]. However, our focus was comparing our results with PRK enhancement after PRK to the specific FDA criteria for safety and efficacy of PRK. Given that a systematic review of the literature concluded that the comparative effectiveness of LASEK versus PRK in treating low to moderate myopic eyes is uncertain [2], we felt it would not be appropriate to compare our results to other surface ablation procedures with different techniques. We do agree that all surface ablation procedures should be considered minimal modification of the same corneal refractive procedure, but since existing scientific literature has intentionally created a distinction between them, we consequently chose to focus our comparison on the traditional surgical form of PRK with complete epithelial debridement. Again, we thank the authors for their comments as well as their valuable contribution to the literature.