After the Trump administration froze over $1 billion in funding to Cornell University last April, biomedical engineer James Antaki faced the difficult decision to retire from his decades-long project: developing an artificial heart specifically designed for infants and young children. His device, roughly the size of a AA battery, was nearing a critical stage, but the suspension of grants forced the shutdown of his laboratory and the layoff of his entire staff. After months of uncertainty and dwindling resources, Dr. Antaki saw little hope for continuation.
Funding was eventually restored shortly before Thanksgiving, but the delay had already caused significant setbacks. Key personnel, including a former postdoctoral researcher, had moved on to other opportunities. Added to this, a university-wide hiring freeze and complex administrative hurdles complicated efforts to restart the research. “I’m embarrassed that we’re not making any forward progress — or just baby steps,” Dr. Antaki admitted, reflecting on the slow recovery.
The disruptions faced by Dr. Antaki are representative of broader challenges impacting scientific research following budget cuts to the U.S. science infrastructure during the past year. Many researchers faced forced interruptions, with funding resumed only after prolonged periods of inactivity. Experts caution that while restored funding can revive projects, it cannot fully compensate for the loss of momentum and continuity that scientific progress relies upon.
Each year, about 14,000 children in the United States are hospitalized with heart failure. Treatment options for teenagers can involve modified adult artificial hearts, but for younger children, surgeons typically depend on the Berlin Heart — an external pump developed in the 1990s. While the Berlin Heart supports patients awaiting transplants, it confines them to intensive care and carries high risks of complications such as infections and strokes. These risks are exacerbated by extended wait times for pediatric heart transplants, which have increased as fewer children die under circumstances permitting organ donation.
The envisioned pediatric artificial heart aims to be implantable within children’s bodies, offering greater mobility and fewer complications, potentially reducing or eliminating the need for a transplant. However, developing such a device is an extraordinary engineering challenge. The pump must be small enough to fit inside a baby’s chest and gentle enough to circulate blood without causing clotting. Researchers emphasize that the rarity and complexity of this work, coupled with limited commercial incentives due to the small pediatric market, mean that federal funding often represents the primary support for such projects.
Before his funding was frozen, Dr. Antaki had a research team, partnerships, and a planned animal study using sheep models similar in size to infants’ circulatory systems. The interruption forced him to return the animals, and by the time funding returned, suitable animals were no longer available. Scheduling surgeons and anesthesiologists, recruiting student monitors, and reestablishing manufacturing partnerships all had to start anew. Administrative obstacles, including travel restrictions affecting potential team members and Cornell’s hiring freeze, compounded the difficulties.
Dr. Antaki estimated that despite a seven-month pause in funding, the overall disruption set his research back by at least twice that period. Beyond logistical challenges, the freeze eroded trust among clinical partners who had been anticipating progress on the device. Experts note that in medicine, the adoption of new technology requires sustained confidence, which can be difficult to rebuild after interruptions.
Despite these setbacks and the uncertainty of government funding, Dr. Antaki remains committed to advancing his work. “There’s no point in being bitter or being angry or getting even,” he said. “I really have no choice but to push forward.”