Background/Aims: Different optimization methods in brachytherapy treatment planning have been used. The aim of this study is to evaluate dosimetric differences between manual optimization (MO) and inverse planning simulated annealing (IPSA) planning techniques commonly used in brachytherapy of cervical cancer. Methods: Fifteen cervical cancer patients were included in this study. Nucletron standard tandem-ovoid (TO) applicators were used for treatment. High-risk clinical tumor volume (HR-CTV), bladder, rectum and sigmoid contouring were performed according to GEC-ESTRO recommendations. Two plans were created for each patient using IPSA and MO techniques. While a dose of 700 cGy was prescribed to the target volume during the planning phase, an effort was made to protect the organs at risk in the best way possible. IPSA and MO planning techniques were compared via dose volume histogram (DVH). Results: There was no significant difference between HR-CTV and CI values for MO and IPSA techniques. There was a significant difference between IPSA and MO techniques for the 2cm3 volume of the rectum (p= 0.002). It was observed that the bladder was better protected by the IPSA technique. There was a 6.26% dose difference between IPSA and MO for the bladder. A significant difference was found between IPSA and MO techniques for the 2cm3 volume of the sigmoid (p= 0.002). The IPSA technique was superior to the MO technique in terms of time. Conclusions: The IPSA technique was superior to the MO technique in terms of protecting organs at risk (OARs). IPSA provides a faster and higher quality plan in cervical brachytherapy.