ObjectivesTo provide an accurate estimate of antenatal HIV screening and its determinants among pregnant women in El Salvador and help local authorities make informed decisions for targeted interventions around mother-to-child transmission (MTCT).MethodsA total sample of 4,730 women aged 15-49 years were interviewed from a random sample of 3,625 households. We collected data on antenatal care services, including HIV screening, during last pregnancy through a pre-established questionnaire. We used a backward elimination multivariate logistic regression model to examine the association between HIV screening and sociodemographic and health care-related factors. ResultsA total of 2,929 women were included in this analysis. About 98% of participants reported receiving antenatal care, but only 83% of these reported being screened for HIV. Screening was lower in geographic areas with higher HIV incidence and ranged from 69.1% among women who were not seen by a physician during antenatal care, to 93.7% among those who attended or completed college. Odds for screening varied also by age, employment status, household economic expenditure, possession of health care coverage, health care settings, and number of antenatal care visits. ConclusionsWe found disparities in HIV screening during antenatal care at the environmental, social, demographic, and structural levels despite a high uptake of antenatal care in El Salvador. Our findings should urge health authorities to tailor and enhance current strategies implemented to eliminate MTCT and reduce inequities and HIV morbidity among women in El Salvador.

Results: 13 pregnancies were followed at our centre: 2 were managed conservatively, in 2 cases we made a cord-occlusion and transection (COT), 2 had a fetal demise before IFL, and 7 were treated with IFL. In our series, we observed a rate of survival of 100% in the conservative management group, of 100% in the COT group and of 57% in the IFL group. Ten studies for a total of 156 cases were included in the meta-analysis. The overall neonatal survival after IFL was 79% (95% CI 0.72-0.86, I 2 22%). A random-effects model comparing neonatal survival for IFL performed before 16 +0 weeks versus at or more than 16 +0 weeks showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups (OR = 0.93; 95% IC 0.37-2.33). Conclusions: IFL is a safe and minimally invasive technique that allows treatment of TRAP sequence, with an overall survival rate of 79%. Gestational age at treatment (before or after 16 weeks) does not seem to affect neonatal survival rate. Given the risk of spontaneous pump twin demise, this would favour early treatment but needs to be confirmed by ongoing randomised controlled studies. VP40.