DH (33) had a UTI a few months back. He hadn’t had anything like this before but was quite run down at the time and it cleared up within a few days of starting antibiotics.
The GP he saw was a trainee and wanted to do bloods and refer him for scans of his bladder/kidneys and to urology just as a precaution. Bloods and scans all came back clear. At the urology appointment, they found a trace of blood in one urine test (non-visible) and recommended cystoscopy. The dr wasn’t really able to provide an explanation of why this is necessary given he has no ongoing symptoms, has never had a UTI before, no family history etc. He referred to the non-visible blood and said in the general population this would be about a 20% risk of bladder cancer and so they should rule this out. I’m not a doctor but have googled and can’t see where he has got the 20% from - non-visible bleeding seems more like 4% and only on recurrent tests. I also can’t see that any of the guidelines would warrant cystoscopy in a 34 yr old male with one uti which resolved on antibiotics. Does anyone have experience of this? Are DH and I right to question the need for such an invasive procedure or would it be best to just go ahead and have it done?