Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad, year by year
Everything the Spanish National Activity Registry publishes about Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad between 2009 and 2023: 15 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
35
2010
22
2011
24
2012
26
2013
23
2014
62
2015
48
2016
73
2017
85
2018
83
2019
67
2020
84
2021
79
2022
60
2023
47
Transfers recorded per year — Egg donationSee this chart’s data
Transfers recorded per year — Egg donation
Year
Value
2009
10
2010
8
2011
10
2012
16
2013
13
2014
19
2015
43
2016
64
2017
37
2018
21
2019
13
2020
2
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
14.1 – 55.9%
14.1 – 55.9%
2010
25.1 – 84%
33.5 – 90.8%
2011
0 – 49.4%
0 – 49.4%
2012
0 – 0%
0 – 71.1%
2013
0 – 55%
0 – 55.2%
2014
19.4 – 68.1%
9.6 – 70.4%
2015
0 – 67.4%
7.9 – 64.8%
2016
44.1 – 94.3%
0 – 62%
2017
25.1 – 84%
17.1 – 100%
2018
0 – 62%
15.2 – 58.5%
2019
0 – 86.7%
0 – 35.4%
2020
0 – 62%
30.2 – 75.1%
2021
10 – 90%
15.2 – 58.5%
2022
4 – 71%
10.6 – 60.8%
2023
0 – 86.7%
0 – 55%
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
8.5 – 54%
8.5 – 54%
2010
0 – 44.8%
0 – 44.8%
2011
10.6 – 60.8%
16.2 – 67.9%
2012
2.5 – 64.1%
9.1 – 73.4%
2013
0 – 62%
0 – 49.4%
2014
15.2 – 64.8%
0 – 71.1%
2015
1.6 – 58.4%
0 – 31.6%
2016
11.6 – 55.1%
0 – 37.9%
2017
12.4 – 46.9%
0 – 37.8%
2018
9.5 – 57.2%
0 – 49.4%
2019
0.5 – 49.5%
—
2020
13.8 – 69.6%
3 – 41.4%
2021
19.1 – 73.3%
1.6 – 58.4%
2022
0 – 46.5%
0 – 28.6%
2023
0 – 67.4%
19 – 81%
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 – 0%
0 – 0%
2010
13.3 – 100%
100 – 100%
2011
0 – 100%
100 – 100%
2012
0 – 0%
0 – 0%
2013
0 – 0%
0 – 0%
2014
0 – 31.6%
—
2015
16 – 74.9%
0 – 86.7%
2016
1 – 53.6%
0 – 35.4%
2017
11.6 – 55.1%
0 – 24%
2018
3 – 41.4%
0 – 30.5%
2019
0 – 40.2%
0 – 40.2%
2020
6.7 – 60%
0 – 18.1%
2021
0 – 32.6%
0 – 17.1%
2022
0 – 40.2%
0 – 40.2%
2023
0 – 40.2%
0 – 40.2%
Egg donation · Under 35
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
See this chart’s data
Egg donation · Under 35
Year
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
2009
0 – 0%
0 – 0%
2010
0 – 100%
0 – 100%
2011
0 – 0%
0 – 0%
2012
100 – 100%
100 – 100%
2013
100 – 100%
100 – 100%
2014
100 – 100%
—
2016
100 – 100%
100 – 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
0 – 0%
0 – 0%
2010
32.6 – 100%
100 – 100%
2011
100 – 100%
100 – 100%
2012
0 – 86.7%
0 – 86.7%
2013
0 – 0%
0 – 0%
2014
13.3 – 100%
—
2015
0 – 67.4%
—
2016
9.6 – 70.4%
—
2017
0 – 71.1%
0 – 37.8%
2018
1 – 99%
0 – 86.7%
2019
—
0 – 100%
Egg donation · Over 40
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
See this chart’s data
Egg donation · Over 40
Year
Fresh embryos
Frozen embryos
2009
0 – 0%
0 – 0%
2010
100 – 100%
100 – 100%
2011
0 – 0%
0 – 100%
2012
0 – 40.2%
0 – 40.2%
2013
0 – 82.9%
9.6 – 97.1%
2014
9.6 – 70.4%
0 – 67.4%
2015
23.3 – 70.8%
13.8 – 61.2%
2016
6 – 44%
2.7 – 39.4%
2017
10 – 90%
0.2 – 46%
2018
0 – 55.1%
—
2019
0 – 67.4%
0 – 62%
AIH — artificial insemination (partner’s sperm) · Under 40See this chart’s data
AIH — artificial insemination (partner’s sperm) · Under 40
Year
Under 40
2010
0 – 0%
2011
0 – 40.2%
2012
0 – 0%
2013
4.3 – 35.7%
2014
0 – 33.9%
AIH — artificial insemination (partner’s sperm) · Under 35See this chart’s data
AIH — artificial insemination (partner’s sperm) · Under 35
Year
Under 35
2015
0 – 35.4%
2016
0.2 – 46%
2017
0 – 25.6%
2018
0 – 40.2%
2019
0 – 17.1%
2020
0 – 23.1%
2021
0 – 24.3%
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
2015
0 – 62%
2017
0 – 35%
2018
0 – 62%
2019
0 – 28.6%
2021
2.5 – 64.1%
AID — artificial insemination (donor sperm) · Under 40See this chart’s data
AID — artificial insemination (donor sperm) · Under 40
Year
Under 40
2010
0 – 0%
2011
0 – 49.4%
2012
0 – 49.4%
2013
1 – 99%
2014
0 – 33.9%
AID — artificial insemination (donor sperm) · Under 35See this chart’s data
AID — artificial insemination (donor sperm) · Under 35
Year
Under 35
2015
0 – 100%
2016
0 – 82.9%
2017
0 – 28.6%
2019
17.1 – 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
2015
0 – 67.4%
2016
1 – 53.6%
2017
4.3 – 49%
2018
0 – 82.9%
2019
100 – 100%
2020
0 – 86.7%
2023
0 – 67.4%
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
Transfers
Pregnancy per transfer (under 35)
Pregnancy per cycle (insemination)
Attribution
2009
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
45
14.1 – 55.9%
No data
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2009-Registro SEF
2010
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
30
25.1 – 84%
0 – 0%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2010-Registro SEF
2011
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
34
0 – 49.4%
0 – 40.2%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2011-Registro SEF
2012
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
42
0 – 0%
0 – 0%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2012-Registro SEF
2013
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
36
0 – 55%
4.3 – 35.7%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2013-Registro SEF
2014
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
81
19.4 – 68.1%
0 – 33.9%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2014-Registro SEF
2015
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
91
0 – 67.4%
0 – 35.4%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2015-Registro SEF
2016
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
137
44.1 – 94.3%
0.2 – 46%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2016-Registro SEF
2017
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
122
25.1 – 84%
0 – 25.6%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2017-Registro SEF
2018
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
104
0 – 62%
0 – 40.2%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2018-Registro SEF
2019
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
80
0 – 86.7%
0 – 17.1%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2019-Registro SEF
2020
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
86
0 – 62%
0 – 23.1%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2020-Registro SEF
2021
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
79
10 – 90%
0 – 24.3%
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2021-Registro SEF
2022
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
60
4 – 71%
No data
Registro Nacional de Actividad 2022-Registro SEF
2023
Instituto Para El Estudio De La Esterilidad
47
0 – 86.7%
0 – 67.4%
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.