Fact check: What are the average costs of penis implant surgery in different US cities in 2025?

1. Why the question can’t be answered with the supplied literature — a transparency check

All seven analytic summaries consistently report that the reviewed studies do not contain city-level pricing for penile implant procedures. One paper provides an average figure for three-stage phalloplasty rather than implants, which is a different operation with distinct resource use and billing ^[1]. Other studies examine online interest, procedural volume by provider, or clinical outcomes and technological advances—none quantify average out-of-pocket or billed costs by city for penile implants in 2025. The absence of that data in these contemporaneous 2025 sources makes city-specific cost estimates impossible to derive from this corpus ^{[2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]}.

2. What the closest available cost figure tells us — phalloplasty as an imperfect proxy

One 2025 study supplies an average cost for 3-stage radial forearm phalloplasty of $14,508.40, but this figure is procedure-specific and not interchangeable with penile implant costs, which involve prosthetic devices, differing operating room times, and surgeon fees; implants frequently carry higher device costs that vary by manufacturer and model ^[1]. Using this phalloplasty figure as a stand-in would misrepresent likely implant pricing; the presence of that single numeric estimate highlights that some 2025 studies report monetary data, but the scope and clinical context are critical and differ from implant surgery.

3. Geographic and practice-distribution data exists but not price data — what that implies

A 2025 analysis mapped the procedure volume and geographic distribution of urologists performing outpatient inflatable penile prosthesis implantation, offering insight into where services are concentrated, but it stops short of reporting prices charged in those regions ^[3]. Geographic concentration of specialists can correlate with price variation—higher competition can lower prices, and centers of excellence can command premiums—but the reviewed study does not provide billing, insurer reimbursement, or patient cost-share data needed to calculate city-level averages ^[3].

4. Consumer interest and clinical focus papers leave economic gaps

Research from 2025 assessed online search trends for penile aesthetic procedures and other studies examined clinical outcomes such as post-operative penile length and aesthetic augmentation options; they inform demand and clinical decision-making but do not quantify costs ^{[2] [4] [5]}. The absence of pricing in these demand- and outcome-oriented papers underscores a gap: academic and clinical literature often omits granular economic reporting, leaving consumers and policymakers without standardized city-specific cost benchmarks ^{[2] [4] [5]}.

5. Technological advances influence cost drivers but do not equate to price data

Two 2025 reviews on technological and design advances in penile prostheses document changes in materials, coatings, and surgical techniques that affect device pricing and total procedure cost over time; however, they do not report actual billed prices by city ^{[6] [7]}. These papers imply that device choice and surgical complexity are important cost drivers—factors that would cause substantial regional variation if price data were available—but the analyses stop at clinical and engineering detail rather than economic quantification ^{[6] [7]}.

6. How to get the city-level costs you asked for — where real answers live

Because the provided 2025 literature lacks the needed figures, assembling accurate city-by-city cost data requires triangulating billing data, insurer reimbursement schedules, hospital chargemasters, and patient out-of-pocket reports, none of which are present in the supplied analyses. For a valid city-level estimate one would need recent proprietary datasets or government claims data (Medicare/Medicaid), hospital financial disclosures, or systematic surveys of urology practices—sources absent from this corpus. Any future answer must cite those economic data sources directly, not clinical or trend studies alone.

7. Final assessment and recommended next steps for obtaining credible city prices

In short, the reviewed 2025 studies do not permit calculation of average penis implant costs by U.S. city; they instead provide related clinical, geographic, and technological context that explains why costs likely vary. To produce the requested list, obtain 2025 claims or billing data, insurer fee schedules, and hospital charge data, and cross-check with device manufacturer pricing. Given the limitations shown here, commissioning a targeted economic study or querying national claims databases is the evidence-based path to the specific city-level numbers you requested ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]}.