Purpose Brachytherapy for gynecological cancers is most frequently used on the world. Physical differences between two sources Co-60 and Ir-192 are known but necessary is compared both sources in treatment planning system. Material and methods For group 60 patients from Brachytherapy Department of the Subcarpathian Oncological Center which were treat for cervical stamp and cervical carcinoma. For both localization 30 plans were selected and treatment plans were made using Ir-192 and Co-60 sources. In system planning system (Oncentra Brachy, Elekta) were entered target and organs at risk (OARs): rectum, bladder, urethra, and pelvic bones. For cervical stamp cancer cylindrical applicator was used, and for cervical carcinoma Fletcher applicator. To comparison selected in target isodoses 100%, 120%, 150%, 200% and 90% for OARs: isodose 100% and dose in 2ccm, for pelvic bones dose in 0,1ccm. In cervical carcinoma doses in ICRU points (AL, AR) were compared. The results were subjected to statistical significance p comparative factor. Results Statistical analysis of the results showed a statistically significant differences for target in cervical stamp for the cover isodose 200%, p = 0.04 and p = 0.05 for cervical cancer. For both locations, there was no statistically significant differences in doses in OARs. For ICRU points (AL, AR) there was no statistically significant differences. Obtained for them AL: Co-60 70,12 ± 12,97 Ir-192 70,87 ± 8,48 p = 0,40, AR: Co-60 83,04 ± 26,88, and for Ir −192 82,87 ± 23,49 p = 0,49. All the results are shown in tables (Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, Table 4). Conclusion The use of two radiation sources is fully justified in cervical stamp and cervical carcinoma cancer. Statistical analysis of the results found no statistically significant differences for significant value to be taken into account during the planning and evaluation of the treatment plan leading to radiation exposure of the patient. Statistically significant differences were found for targets in both locations for 200% isodose. Doses were smaller for Ir-192 source. These differences were respectively about 1,5% for cervical stamp, and about 2% for cervical cancer. These differences combined with the lack of differences in the other doses is in favor of Co-60 because of increasing the dose into the tumor. Comparable doses are equal for both radiation sources so we know that both sources of radiation can be used in brachytherapy in gynecological cancers. Brachytherapy for gynecological cancers is most frequently used on the world. Physical differences between two sources Co-60 and Ir-192 are known but necessary is compared both sources in treatment planning system. For group 60 patients from Brachytherapy Department of the Subcarpathian Oncological Center which were treat for cervical stamp and cervical carcinoma. For both localization 30 plans were selected and treatment plans were made using Ir-192 and Co-60 sources. In system planning system (Oncentra Brachy, Elekta) were entered target and organs at risk (OARs): rectum, bladder, urethra, and pelvic bones. For cervical stamp cancer cylindrical applicator was used, and for cervical carcinoma Fletcher applicator. To comparison selected in target isodoses 100%, 120%, 150%, 200% and 90% for OARs: isodose 100% and dose in 2ccm, for pelvic bones dose in 0,1ccm. In cervical carcinoma doses in ICRU points (AL, AR) were compared. The results were subjected to statistical significance p comparative factor. Statistical analysis of the results showed a statistically significant differences for target in cervical stamp for the cover isodose 200%, p = 0.04 and p = 0.05 for cervical cancer. For both locations, there was no statistically significant differences in doses in OARs. For ICRU points (AL, AR) there was no statistically significant differences. Obtained for them AL: Co-60 70,12 ± 12,97 Ir-192 70,87 ± 8,48 p = 0,40, AR: Co-60 83,04 ± 26,88, and for Ir −192 82,87 ± 23,49 p = 0,49. All the results are shown in tables (Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, Table 4). The use of two radiation sources is fully justified in cervical stamp and cervical carcinoma cancer. Statistical analysis of the results found no statistically significant differences for significant value to be taken into account during the planning and evaluation of the treatment plan leading to radiation exposure of the patient. Statistically significant differences were found for targets in both locations for 200% isodose. Doses were smaller for Ir-192 source. These differences were respectively about 1,5% for cervical stamp, and about 2% for cervical cancer. These differences combined with the lack of differences in the other doses is in favor of Co-60 because of increasing the dose into the tumor. Comparable doses are equal for both radiation sources so we know that both sources of radiation can be used in brachytherapy in gynecological cancers.