Everything the Spanish National Activity Registry publishes about ESIMER between 2009 and 2011: 3 years with data. Each year carries its own attribution, because each year is a separate publication of the registry.
Volume first
Activity comes before results on purpose: a high percentage over few cycles does not mean what the same percentage over many cycles means. The registry publishes cycles as bands and that is how we show them, never reduced to a single figure; transfers are an exact count.
Transfers recorded per year — IVF/ICSI with own oocytesSee this chart’s data
Transfers recorded per year — IVF/ICSI with own oocytes
Year
Value
2009
88
2010
90
2011
63
Transfers recorded per year — Egg donationSee this chart’s data
Transfers recorded per year — Egg donation
Year
Value
2009
18
2010
22
2011
17
Results, year by year
Each band is the interval the registry published that year: the floor and the ceiling of the estimate, not a point. There is no line joining the years, and that is deliberate — joining the centres of successive intervals would assert a trend the data does not support.
IVF/ICSI with own oocytes · Under 35
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
See this chart’s data
IVF/ICSI with own oocytes · Under 35
Year
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
2009
20.7 – 54.3%
38.7 – 73.1%
2010
25.6 – 61.1%
36.5 – 72.1%
2011
6 – 44%
14.3 – 56.2%
IVF/ICSI with own oocytes · Between 35 and 39
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
See this chart’s data
IVF/ICSI with own oocytes · Between 35 and 39
Year
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
2009
15.9 – 41.2%
19.2 – 45.4%
2010
18.6 – 44.1%
27.4 – 54.4%
2011
11.6 – 41.3%
19.5 – 51.7%
IVF/ICSI with own oocytes · Over 40
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
See this chart’s data
IVF/ICSI with own oocytes · Over 40
Year
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
2009
0 – 37.8%
0 – 37.8%
2010
0 – 42.9%
0 – 42.9%
2011
0 – 28%
2.6 – 35.3%
Egg donation · Under 35
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
See this chart’s data
Egg donation · Under 35
Year
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
2009
0 – 86.7%
0 – 86.7%
2010
100 – 100%
100 – 100%
2011
0 – 100%
0 – 100%
Egg donation · Between 35 and 39
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
See this chart’s data
Egg donation · Between 35 and 39
Year
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
2009
20.5 – 93.8%
20.5 – 93.8%
2010
28.9 – 100%
100 – 100%
2011
10 – 90%
48 – 100%
Egg donation · Over 40
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
See this chart’s data
Egg donation · Over 40
Year
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
2009
1.6 – 58.4%
21.5 – 83.5%
2010
21.4 – 71.9%
56.7 – 98.8%
2011
23.1 – 88%
40.5 – 100%
AIH — artificial insemination (partner’s sperm) · Under 40See this chart’s data
AIH — artificial insemination (partner’s sperm) · Under 40
Year
Under 40
2010
7.4 – 31.6%
2011
7.7 – 42.3%
AID — artificial insemination (donor sperm) · Under 40See this chart’s data
AID — artificial insemination (donor sperm) · Under 40
Year
Under 40
2010
9.9 – 44%
2011
3.4 – 43.7%
Year-by-year table
The table is the exact and complete reading: everything in the charts, and more. Each row cites the wording the registry requires for that year.
Year
Name in the registry
Cycles started
Transfers
Pregnancy per transfer (under 35)
Pregnancy per cycle (insemination)
Attribution
2009
ESIMER
100-500
106
20.7 – 54.3%
No data
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2009-Registro SEF
2010
ESIMER
100-500
112
25.6 – 61.1%
7.4 – 31.6%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2010-Registro SEF
2011
ESIMER
No data
80
6 – 44%
7.7 – 42.3%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2011-Registro SEF
Gaps in the series, and how to read them
The registry’s province-by-province census returns empty for 2009 and 2010, even though the individual profiles for those years do exist and have been recovered one by one. A centre missing from a given year means the registry publishes no profile for it that year — not that it closed.
The registry’s template changed schema in 2014 and again in 2015: up to 2013, cycles, implantation and transfers are published without separating fresh from frozen embryos, and insemination is published for a single age band (“under 40”). That is why some years carry fewer series than others: it is what the source published, not a missing figure.
And most important: a change from one year to the next is not, on its own, an improvement or a decline. The patient mix changes, selection criteria change and, at small volumes, chance changes too. Wide intervals are precisely the signal that the exact number cannot be trusted.
