CHAPTER XIV. 

 HOFBAUER CELLS IN NORMAL AND PATHOLOGIC CONCEPTUSES. 



The history of these cells illustrates very well how a rediscovery, when accom- 

 panied by a fuller description, succeeds in domiciling itself in anatomical literature 

 as an original discovery. As we shall presently see, Hofbauer (1905) was impressed 

 especially by a conspicuous phase in the life-history of a particular cell. He 

 noted its reaction, in the fresh state, to certain stains, described it more fully, and 

 speculated with some freedom on its functional role; but he did not discover this 

 cell, as he supposed, in 1903. Although Hofbauer, in his book published in 1905, 

 referred to his address given in 1903, he did not refer to or list the paper based on 

 this address, published in 1903, in the title of which these cells are referred to as 

 "hitherto unknown" and as "constantly occurring." Hofbauer's failure, in 1905, 

 to recognize earlier workers was, I presume, an oversight, which apparently led 

 Essick (1915) and others to assume that "Hofbauer first called attention to specific 

 round cells appearing in the human placenta toward the end of the fourth week of 

 pregnancy." 



The type of cell which in recent years has been designated with Hofbauer's 

 name was known previously, especially as Wanderzelle, and had been represented 

 by various investigators. Minot (1911), in a footnote, referred to the latter fact 

 and rightly added: "It has long been known that strikingly large free cells appear 

 in the mesenchyme of the chorion. They are pictured in my Human Embryology." 

 Reference to the illustration in this work shows a large, rather granular cell, with 

 a somewhat eccentrically placed, vesicular nucleus, but without vacuoles. More- 

 over, previous to the publication of this Embryology, Minot (1889) not only spoke 

 of large, granular, wandering cells in the stroma of the chorion, but also repre- 

 sented them. From Minot's familiarity with the work of Langhans (1877) and of 

 Kastschenko (1885), it does not seem unlikely that, among others, he had these 

 investigators particularly in mind when he referred to earlier descriptions. 



In the absence of a more discriminating term for these erratic and largely 

 ephemeral elements, the original designation of wandering cell would seem far 

 preferable to the designation "lipoid interstitial cells," used by certain Italian writers. 

 The former is a non-committal term and, although too inclusive, is for this reason 

 no more objectionable than the expression giant cell. Although these cells may 

 not indeed, probably do not wander in the sense of the amceba or the leucocyte, 

 they nevertheless may change their location decidedly. The qualification "inter- 

 stitial" is objectionable for the very reason for which it was chosen the alleged 

 analogy to the interstitial cells of the testis and ovary and since they may con- 

 tain lipoid substances merely because they are degenerate, the adjective lipoid 

 is equally objectionable. For reasons to appear later, the designation "plasma cell" 

 used by certain Italian writers since 1905, would not seem to be justified. 



Virchow (1871) stated that isolated cells with clear vesicular spaces in their 

 protoplasm are found in the stroma of the villi in cases of hydatiform degeneration, 



301 



