Hospital Ruber Juan Bravo Quironsalud-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L., year by year
Everything the Spanish National Activity Registry publishes about Hospital Ruber Juan Bravo Quironsalud-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L. between 2011 and 2023: 13 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
2011
54
2012
35
2013
25
2014
35
2015
38
2016
66
2017
96
2018
120
2019
121
2020
93
2021
85
2022
84
2023
51
Transfers recorded per year — Egg donationSee this chart’s data
Transfers recorded per year — Egg donation
Year
Value
2011
10
2012
27
2013
15
2014
33
2015
37
2016
47
2017
56
2018
80
2019
75
2020
62
2021
35
2022
16
2023
4
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
2011
14.8 – 49.4%
19.6 – 55.4%
2012
2.5 – 64.1%
4.3 – 49%
2013
0 – 55.1%
0 – 62%
2014
0 – 82.9%
0 – 67.4%
2015
19 – 81%
0 – 86.7%
2016
100 – 100%
17.1 – 100%
2017
50.6 – 100%
4.9 – 52.2%
2018
0 – 62%
36 – 78.3%
2019
25.1 – 84%
23.2 – 66.8%
2020
68.4 – 100%
38.6 – 83.6%
2021
64.6 – 100%
28 – 64.9%
2022
100 – 100%
9.5 – 57.2%
2023
—
12 – 64.9%
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
2011
27.4 – 68.2%
27.4 – 68.2%
2012
23.8 – 76.2%
14.1 – 55.9%
2013
39.2 – 89.4%
35.4 – 82.2%
2014
17.8 – 64.6%
100 – 100%
2015
0 – 35.4%
0 – 86.7%
2016
15.2 – 64.8%
2.5 – 64.1%
2017
11.6 – 49.2%
12.6 – 58%
2018
33.2 – 76.8%
17.3 – 58.9%
2019
31.8 – 72.6%
33.7 – 66.3%
2020
30.4 – 86.2%
32.4 – 71.6%
2021
28.1 – 78.6%
51.5 – 92.9%
2022
12 – 76.9%
27.1 – 55.5%
2023
0 – 71.1%
24.5 – 63.5%
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
2011
9.6 – 70.4%
9.6 – 70.4%
2012
0 – 55%
0 – 37.8%
2013
0 – 0%
0 – 0%
2015
35.9 – 97.5%
—
2016
26.9 – 73.1%
1.6 – 58.4%
2017
5.7 – 55.9%
9.9 – 50.1%
2018
23.3 – 61.3%
10.7 – 52.5%
2019
17.8 – 64.6%
10.6 – 60.8%
2020
12 – 76.9%
9.9 – 50.1%
2021
0 – 55%
0 – 55%
2022
—
2.5 – 64.1%
2023
32.6 – 100%
0 – 86.7%
Egg donation · Under 35
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
See this chart’s data
Egg donation · Under 35
Year
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
2011
0 – 100%
0 – 100%
2012
44.9 – 100%
44.9 – 100%
2013
100 – 100%
100 – 100%
2016
—
17.1 – 100%
2017
—
0 – 86.7%
2018
—
0 – 86.7%
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
2011
13.3 – 100%
13.3 – 100%
2012
6.2 – 79.5%
4 – 71%
2013
100 – 100%
0 – 100%
2014
28.9 – 100%
—
2015
100 – 100%
32.6 – 100%
2016
100 – 100%
0 – 100%
2017
100 – 100%
4 – 71%
2018
—
17.1 – 100%
2019
1 – 99%
35.2 – 92.1%
2020
0 – 100%
4 – 71%
2021
—
100 – 100%
2022
—
44.9 – 100%
Egg donation · Over 40
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
See this chart’s data
Egg donation · Over 40
Year
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
2011
28.9 – 100%
28.9 – 100%
2012
35.2 – 92.1%
19.4 – 68.1%
2013
6.7 – 60%
19.1 – 73.3%
2014
31.2 – 83.1%
29.6 – 90.4%
2015
59 – 100%
35.4 – 82.2%
2016
50.6 – 100%
33 – 70.7%
2017
6.7 – 60%
19.4 – 53.9%
2018
35.2 – 92.1%
22.9 – 47.1%
2019
50.5 – 99.5%
23.8 – 51.2%
2020
45 – 100%
44.6 – 73.6%
2021
100 – 100%
31.5 – 68.5%
2022
100 – 100%
9.6 – 70.4%
2023
—
1 – 99%
AIH — artificial insemination (partner’s sperm) · Under 40See this chart’s data
AIH — artificial insemination (partner’s sperm) · Under 40
Year
Under 40
2011
0 – 0%
2012
1.6 – 30.4%
2013
1.6 – 30.4%
2014
12.1 – 42.5%
AIH — artificial insemination (partner’s sperm) · Under 35See this chart’s data
AIH — artificial insemination (partner’s sperm) · Under 35
Year
Under 35
2018
0 – 86.7%
2019
0 – 17.1%
2022
0 – 49.4%
2023
100 – 100%
AIH — artificial insemination (partner’s sperm) · Between 35 and 39See this chart’s data
AIH — artificial insemination (partner’s sperm) · Between 35 and 39
Year
Between 35 and 39
2017
4 – 71%
2018
17.1 – 100%
2021
0 – 49.4%
AID — artificial insemination (donor sperm) · Under 40See this chart’s data
AID — artificial insemination (donor sperm) · Under 40
Year
Under 40
2011
0 – 55.1%
2012
0 – 0%
2013
0 – 46.5%
AID — artificial insemination (donor sperm) · Under 35See this chart’s data
AID — artificial insemination (donor sperm) · Under 35
Year
Under 35
2016
0 – 100%
2017
0 – 86.7%
2018
0 – 67.4%
2019
0 – 100%
2020
0 – 100%
AID — artificial insemination (donor sperm) · Between 35 and 39See this chart’s data
AID — artificial insemination (donor sperm) · Between 35 and 39
Year
Between 35 and 39
2016
0 – 31.6%
2019
0 – 67.4%
2020
0 – 86.7%
2022
100 – 100%
2023
0 – 86.7%
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
2011
Clinica Ruber-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L.
No data
64
14.8 – 49.4%
0 – 0%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2011-Registro SEF
2012
Clinica Ruber-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L.
No data
62
2.5 – 64.1%
1.6 – 30.4%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2012-Registro SEF
2013
Clinica Ruber-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L.
No data
40
0 – 55.1%
1.6 – 30.4%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2013-Registro SEF
2014
Clinica Ruber-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L.
No data
68
0 – 82.9%
12.1 – 42.5%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2014-Registro SEF
2015
Clinica Ruber-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L.
No data
75
19 – 81%
No data
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2015-Registro SEF
2016
Hospital Ruber Juan Bravo Quironsalud-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L.
No data
113
100 – 100%
0 – 100%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2016-Registro SEF
2017
Hospital Ruber Juan Bravo Quironsalud-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L.
100-500
152
50.6 – 100%
4 – 71%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2017-Registro SEF
2018
Hospital Ruber Juan Bravo Quironsalud-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L.
100-500
200
0 – 62%
0 – 86.7%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2018-Registro SEF
2019
Hospital Ruber Juan Bravo Quironsalud-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L.
100-500
196
25.1 – 84%
0 – 17.1%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2019-Registro SEF
2020
Hospital Ruber Juan Bravo Quironsalud-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L.
No data
155
68.4 – 100%
0 – 100%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2020-Registro SEF
2021
Hospital Ruber Juan Bravo Quironsalud-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L.
No data
120
64.6 – 100%
0 – 49.4%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2021-Registro SEF
2022
Hospital Ruber Juan Bravo Quironsalud-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L.
No data
100
100 – 100%
0 – 49.4%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2022-Registro SEF
2023
Hospital Ruber Juan Bravo Quironsalud-Centro de Reproducción Madrid, S.L.
No data
55
No data
100 – 100%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2023-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.