Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 801

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Gas Embolism

Muth, Claus M., Shank, Erik S.·2000·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Gas embolism, the entry of gas into vascular structures, is a largely iatrogenic clinical problem that can result in serious morbidity and even death.1 Since gas embolism can result from procedures performed in almost all clinical specialties (Table 1), it is important for all clinicians to be aware of this problem. In most cases, gas embolism is air embolism, although the medical use of other gases, such as carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and nitrogen, can also result in the condition. There are two broad categories of gas embolism, venous and arterial, which are distinguished by the mechanism of gas entry . . .

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm200002173420706

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 801

Metadata

Authors
Muth, C. M., & Shank, E. S.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2000-02-17
Volume
342
Issue
7
Pages
476-482
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W4249919416
Cited by
801
References
0
FWCI
14.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Gas Embolism. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm200002173420706
The paper
Muth, C. M., & Shank, E. S. (2000). Gas Embolism. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm200002173420706

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.