Referee Stuart Dougal did not get a proper view of the original incident during Celtic's 2-1 victory on Tuesday night so he has handed the incident on to the panel.
McDonald is the second Celtic player to be referred this week after Glenn Loovens' challenge on Rangers midfielder Maurice Edu sparked another probe.
An Scottish Football Association spokesman said: "The same review panel will consider both incidents and we hope to get it convened by the end of this week."
Both players will be free to play in Celtic's Scottish Premier League run-in as the review panel refer the matter to the SFA's disciplinary committee, which will next meet following the end of the season, if they decide either player has a case to answer.
McDonald's studs caught Wilkie on the shin after he raised his foot while stretching to make a sliding challenge.
The incident sparked a major row between Dougal and United boss Craig Levein, who criticised the referee's response after being urged to allow treatment to the defender.
"He lost his composure, stuck his finger in my face and told me to shut up," the United boss said after the game. "It wasn't acceptable.
"In all my time in football, no other referee has ever done that.
"I have lost all respect for him after the way he spoke to me.
"If it happened in the pub on a Saturday night to any of you guys, the guy would have got a punch in the face."
Levein continued: "I asked him why he didn't stop the play for Lee Wilkie to get treatment and I don't think that is unreasonable.
"If you were Lee Wilkie and you had been out of the game for three years, you would be upset.
"It is compounded by the fact that he wouldn't let anyone come on, he didn't believe him.
"If he wants to look at the stud mark above Lee's shin he can do that."
Wilkie was also angered by the referee's response to his request for treatment.
"I said to the referee at half time, 'what were you playing at?' and he said, quite arrogantly, that his kids had had bigger knocks than that, which was a stupid comment to make - his kids must be some size."
Levein may yet find himself in trouble over his comments if the SFA's general purposes committee decide to take the matter further.