Skip to main content
Ophthalmology and Therapy logoLink to Ophthalmology and Therapy
letter
. 2021 Jul 9;10(3):701–702. doi: 10.1007/s40123-021-00371-0

A Response to: Letter to the Editor Regarding PRK Enhancement for Residual Refractive Error After Primary PRK: A Retrospective Study

Majid Moshirfar 1,✉, Yasmyne Ronquillo 1, Shannon McCabe 1
PMCID: PMC8319265  PMID: 34244978

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.

Acknowledgements

Funding

No funding or sponsorship was received for this study or publication of this article.

Authorship

All named authors meet the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) criteria for authorship for this article, take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, and have given their approval for this version to be published.

Author Contributions

All authors contributed equally to the preparation of this letter.

Disclosures

Majid Moshirfar, Yasmyne Ronquillo and Shannon McCabe have nothing to disclose.

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

This article is based on previously conducted studies and does not contain any new studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  • 1.De Benito-Llopis L, Teus MA. Efficacy of surface ablation retreatments using mitomycin C. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010;150(3):376–380. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2010.03.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Li SM, Zhan S, Li SY, Peng XX, Hu J, Law HA, Wang NL. Laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) versus photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for correction of myopia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2:CD009799. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009799.pub2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Ophthalmology and Therapy are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES