Contextual analysis of the first SARS-CoV-2 RNA screening period in nasopharyngeal swabs, 2020-2022: a comparison of two diagnostic tests

Background: exceptionally consistent COVID-19 laboratory diagnostics are crucial for case identification, patient management and contact tracing. The Coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected over 771.407.825 people up until October 2023, with over 6.9 million deaths. The current process of clinical laboratory consolidation, impacting large geographic areas, presents an opportunity for the efficient and cost-effective implementation of novel laboratory technologies, as well as advancements in translational research and development. The aim of this study was to assess which of the two instruments could offer the most effective support to our laboratory’s activities, minimizing errors during the pre-analytical phase, optimizing human resources, and reducing the Turn-Around-Time (TAT). Materials and Methods: the diagnostic instruments available in the Microbiology laboratory of the Azienda Ospedaliero- Universitaria SS Antonio e Biagio e Cesare Arrigo (AOUAL) were the COBAS 6800 and the ALINITY platforms. Conclusions: the Alinity platform offers clinicians a more user-friendly approach to understanding patient infectivity, compared to the closed Cobas system. It permits clinicians to review curves and access a cumulative Cycle Threshold (Ct), facilitating the hypothesis of acute or initial/final infection stages. This positions Alinity by Abbott as the preferred system over other instruments.