Drs Shulimzon and Segel correctly point out that in the 1,115 procedures, 1,836 different treatment modalities were used. In this case, treatment modalities refer to any stent, dilation, or ablative procedure. Ablative refers to the use of modalities that destroy tissue, so, in this case, it is the use of electrocautery, argon plasma coagulation, laser, or cryotherapy. It is probably best to assess the cohort by considering ablation and stenting separately, since ablation techniques can be used somewhat interchangeably to deal with certain problems (eg, electrocautery or laser can either be used for an endobronchial lesion), but an ablation technique cannot be used as a substitute for stenting in certain cases (eg, extrinsic compression). A total of 982 ablative techniques were used in 879 procedures (79%), so, on average, 1.12 different ablative techniques were used per procedure. Stents were used in 406 procedures (36%). Not all institutions had access to every ablative technique, and not all centers performed rigid bronchoscopy. Therefore, the reason why a particular modality was chosen over another in a given case cannot be determined, and, in some cases, there was probably no choice. However, we did not find evidence that the type of ablative method used impacted outcome.