Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42514782›Full record

ReviewPolymers2026

Recycling of Poly(lactic acid): From Molecular Degradation to Circular End-of-Life Strategies.

Hasan Saygin, Asli Baysal

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Polymers, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Hasan SayginApplication and Research Center for Advanced Studies, Istanbul Aydin University, Sefakoy Kucukcekmece, 34295 Istanbul, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0003-2479-7635
Asli BaysalDepartment of Chemistry, Faculty of Science and Letters, Istanbul Technical University, Maslak, 34469 Istanbul, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0002-0178-7808

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Poly(lactic acid) (PLA) is widely recognized as a biodegradable bioplastic, yet reliance on industrial composting alone can forfeit embedded material and energy value when recovery is technically feasible. Recycling can retain this value, but PLA performance is affected by service-life aging, hydrolytic cleavage, thermal and shear history, and contamination. Whereas previous literature often treats end-of-life routes separately, this review integrates mechanical reprocessing, reactive upgrading, chemical and hydrothermal depolymerization, and life-cycle assessment within a feedstock-process-structure-performance-safety-circularity framework. We examine how molar mass, rheology, crystallinity, and mechanical performance evolve during recycling, and compare upgrading strategies, including chain extenders, plasticizers, blends, and fillers, in terms of property restoration, recyclability, migration, and ecotoxicity trade-offs. Chemical and hydrothermal routes are evaluated according to monomer yield, stereochemical purity, additive tolerance, repolymerization potential, and process severity. Life-cycle evidence shows that circularity cannot be defined solely by climate impact or biodegradability, as burden shifting may occur in terms of toxicity, energy demand, land use, and resource consumption. Accordingly, we propose a decision map linking feedstock quality with suitable routes and target applications. Overall, clean, dry, and traceable PLA should be prioritized for mechanical recycling, whereas degraded or contaminated streams require evidence-based upgrading or depolymerization instead of default disposal or composting practices.

Indexed as

circular economylife-cycle assessmentmechanical recyclingpoly(lactic acid)post-consumer bioplasticsproduct safety

Identifiers

PMID42514782
PMCPMC13418005

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.