Although much had been written previously, the work of Hanot and Gilbert1 was the first comprehensive investigation of primary carcinoma of the liver and marked a distinct epoch in the study of the disease. Numerous contributions followed this before the publication of Eggel's2 great work, the most notable in the interim being that of Siegenbeek van Heukelom3 whose brevity, clearness and penetrating logic demonstrated a most comprehensive grasp of the subject.
It is not my purpose to go into the details of the voluminous literature on primary carcinoma of the liver, for the works mentioned are most painstaking in this respect. Furthermore some of the more recent essays on the subject bring the literature completely up to date; among these works should be mentioned the writings of Conti,4 Fulci,5 Bertelli,6 Theodorow,7 Ribbert,8 Cruickshank and Teacher,9 and of Fabiani.10
KARSNER HT. A CLINICOPATHOLOGICAL STUDY OF PRIMARY CARCINOMA OF THE LIVER. Arch Intern Med (Chic). 1911;VIII(2):238-261. doi:10.1001/archinte.1911.00060080118010