For me the key differences are
1) the size of labs likely to use full lab automation ie biom/copan type products.
2) apas could be an end to end process. (If including automated streaking and incubation with robotic reading). Others are not yet.
These biom/ copan/ bd fla tla type products are designed to have a large throughput of work and replace a significant percentage of front end lab. They still rely upon a core group of skilled and experience micro staff to report all culture results. This is not an end to end process. These are targeted at the largest labs. BD also have a range of sophisticated full lab automation. Again quite expensive relatively. They are looking at having computer assisted reporting potentially able to report cultures with no growth. No reading of cultures yet.
I would expect the end game for the apas range to cover processing through to reading or reporting. Ie an end to end process with minimal human intervention. There may be some cultures too complex for the a.i to interpret, which would be refered to micro lab staff, but negative cultures and simple single organism cultures may not need any human checking. I would also expect the apas range to be more affordable as well as modular, and therefore target medium to large labs. Perhaps even small labs if price vs efficiency works out.
This is just my opinion on the future direction of micro labs. Could be wrong. But this is where the growth for lbt will be maintained, up to blue sky vision........ Also not factoring in future ai imaging products in development.
Cheers.
Uly
LBT Price at posting:
87.0¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
