BACKGROUNDThe objective of this survey was to assess retrospectively the interest of performing viscosupplementation using imaging guidance in patients suffering from ankle osteoarthritis (OA).PATIENTS AND METHODSThis is a multicenter retrospective survey using a standardized questionnaire. Fifty patients suffering from ankle OA and treated, in daily clinical practice, with a single intra-articular injection of a novel viscosupplement made of a combination of a non-animal cross-linked hyaluronan and mannitol, HANOX M-XL, were included in the survey. The injection procedure (imaging or landmark guidance), demographic data, patient’s self-evaluation of pain, satisfaction, treatment efficacy, and tolerability were collected. Predictive factors of both efficacy and patient’s satisfaction were investigated.RESULTSThe percentages of patients very satisfied/satisfied and not really satisfied/dissatisfied with the treatment were 68% and 32%, respectively. Efficacy was rated as very good, good, moderate, and poor by 38%, 30%, 12%, and 20% of the cases, respectively. Efficacy was unrelated to gender and age and was highly correlated with pain score (P < 0.0001). In satisfied patients, the decrease in consumption of analgesics/non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs was >75% in 64% of the cases. Efficacy was significantly different with regard to imaging guidance. There was a statistically significant difference in efficacy and satisfaction between landmark-guided and imaging-guided injections (P = 0.02). The success rate was 2.3 times higher in the imaging-guided group than in the landmark-guided group. No significant difference was found between patients injected under fluoroscopy or ultrasound guidance, despite a trend favoring ultrasound (P = 0.09). Tolerability was rated as very good/good in 47 patients, moderate in two, and poor in one and was unrelated to the type of guidance.CONCLUSIONThis preliminary study suggests that the use of imaging guidance significantly optimizes the success rate of ankle viscosupplementation. No safety concern was observed.LEVEL OF EVIDENCEIII.